cbc University of Chicago
It ib varies
.
PEOPHECY AND HISTOET
PROPHECY AND HISTORY
for 1880-4884>
WWO APPENDICES ON THE ARRANGEMENT, ANALYSIS, AND
RECENT CRITICISM OP THE PENTATEUCH
BT
ALFRED EDEESHEIM, M.A. OXOK, D.D., Pe.D.
u
JLTJTHOBOV
'UPB AND TIMES 0V JESUS THH
AUTHOR'S EDITION
NEW TOEK
D. F. RANDOLPH & COMPANY
38 WEST TWENTY-THIRD STREET
LONDON
LONGMANS, GEEEN & CO.
Ii , . r f
\
K3| *"J| ""H iKSf JfSSf y~"*
YllOVO
TO
HENRY WAGE, D.D.
frebtndary o/ St. PauV Cathedral; Preacher of Lincoln's Inn; Principal tf
Kin ft College, London; Honorary Chaplain to the Queen; and
Chaplain to the Archbishop o/ Canterbury,
IN BINCEEB ESTEEM AND FRIENDSHIP.
PBEFACE.
THE VOLUME herewith presented to the reader con*
tains the Lectures delivered during the years 1 880-84
in the Cbapel of Lincoln's Inn on the foundation of
Bishop Warburton. Its object, as expressed in the
Will of the founder, is ' to prove the truth of re-
vealed religion in general, and of the Christian in
particular, from the completion of those prophecies
in the Old and Few Testaments which relate to the
Christian Church, especially to the apostacy of Papal
Eome.'
From the wide range of subjects thus opened,
it was necessary to select one and naturally that,
which would most directly meet the present phase
of theological discussion, and so best fulfil the pur-
pose for which the Lectureship had been instituted.
Not, indeed, that the primary object should be nega-
tive, either in the defence of Catholic truth from its
assailants, or in the refutation of objections brought
against it. For all proper defence of truth must
PREFACE.
aim after this positive result : more clearly to define,
and more accurately to set forth., that which is cer-
tainly believed among us. And this, in the good
guidance of our God, is the higher meaning and
issue of theological controversy. As every schism
and separation indicate some truth which had been
neglected, or temporarily ignored, by the Church,
so each controversy marks some point on which
the teaching of the Church had been wanting in
clearness, accuracy, or fulness. And so every con-
troversy, however bitter or threatening in its course,
ultimately contributes to the establishment of truth
-not merely, nor even principally, by the answer
to objections which it calls forth, but by the fuller
consideration of what had been invalidated, and the
consequent wider and more accurate understanding of
it. Thus, long after the din of controversy has ceased,
with all of human infirmity attending it, and the never-
ending conflict between truth and error has passed to
another battle-field, the peaceful fruits of the contest
remain as a permanent gain. In the end it may be so,
that much that has proved indefensible and which
all along had only been held because it was traditional,
and had never before been properly considered
may have to be given up ; and that the old truth
PREFACE. IX
may have to be presented in new forms, as the result
of more accurate investigation and more scientific
criticism. Yet still every contest, whatever its trials
or the seeming loss, ultimately issues in what is better
than victory in real advance. But to each of us,
who in loving loyalty has sought to contribute, ac-
cording to his capacity, to the defence and further
elucidation of what we cherish as the Eevelation of
God to man, comes this comfort of no small inward
reassurance. We may have only partially succeeded
in our effort ; we may have even failed of success.
But every defence and attempt at clearer elucidation,
unless wholly ungrounded in reason or criticism, at
least shows that defence and a clearer and higher
position are possible, even though we may not have
reached to it ; and it points out the direction which
others, perhaps more successful than we, may follow.
Thus here also 'both he that soweth and he that
reapeth may rejoice together/ For, the end is
certain not that full and free criticism may be sup-
pressed, but that it may be utilised, that so on the
evening of the battle there may be assured peace,
and the golden light shine around the old truth in
her new garments of conquest, revealing the full
.perfection of her beauty.
X PREFACE.
Some contribution, however humble, towards this
end, has been the object of these Lectures. Their
form and limits prevented anything like the com-
plete and scientific treatment which I could have
wished. Yet the main questions concerning the Old
Testament and its Messianic hope have been faced,
and, in some respects, viewed under a new aspect. On
Prophetism, as essentially distinguished from heathen
divination ; on Prophecy, as distinct from prophecies ;
on its wider relation to fulfilment ; as well as on other
cognate subjects, the views here expressed will, I
venture to think, be found different from those
hitherto presented. It need scarcely be stated, that
at the present time the questions connected with the
Old Testament occupy the foreground of theological
discussion. Whether, or not, there is in the Old
Testament any prophecy in the true and, as we had
regarded it, the Scriptural sense ; whether there were
of old any directly God-sent prophets in Israel, with
a message from heaven for the present, as well as for
the future; whether there was any Messianic hope
from the beginning, and any conception of a spiritual
Messiah ; nay, whether the state of religious belief
in Israel was as we had hitherto imagined, or quite
different ; whether, indeed, there were any Mosaic
xi
institutions at all, or else the greater part of what we
call such, if not the whole, dated from much later
times the central and most important portion of
them, from after the Exile ; whether, in short, our
views on all these points have to be completely
changed, so that, instead of the Law and the Pro-
phets, we should have to speak of the Prophets
and the Law ; and, instead of Moses and the
Prophets, of the Prophets and the Priests ; and the
larger part of Old Testament literature should be
ascribed to Exilian and post-Exilian times, or bears
the impress of their falsifications : these are some of
the questions which now engage theological think-
ers, and which on the negative side are advocated by
critics of such learning and skill, as to have secured,
not only on the Continent, but even among our-
selves, a large number of zealous adherents.
In these circumstances it would have seemed
nothing short of dereliction of duty on the part
of one holding such a lectureship indeed, incon-
sistent with its real object to have simply passed
by such discussions. For, in my view at least,
they concern not only critical questions, but the
very essence of our faith in ' the truth of revealed
religion in general, and of the Christian in par-
301
ticular.' To say that Jesus is the Christ, means
that He is the Messiah promised and predicted in
the Old Testament ; while the views above referred
to respecting the history, legislation, institutions, and
prophecies of the Old Testament, seem incompatible
alike with Messianic predictions in the Christian
sense, . and even with real belief in the Divine
authority of the larger portion of our Bible. And,
if the Old Testament be thus surrendered, it is
difficult to understand how the claims of the New,
which is based on it, can be long or seriously
sustained. Hence, while attempting to show the pro-
phetic character of the Old Testament and its fulfil-
ment in Jesus Christ, it seemed necessary to secure
our position against attack both in front and rear.
For the latter purpose I have sought to establish
(in Lecture HI.) what the . primitive belief of the
Church really was, by a reference to those portions
of the Gospel-narratives which the most extreme
negative criticism admits to be an authentic record
of the faith of the early Christians, and by making
similar examination of the apostolic testimony to
the Gospel-facts in such of the apostolic writings
of which the genuineness is not called in question.
Having thus ascertained what was the earliest
PREFACE. xill
tradition of the Church concerning the Christ, say
about thirty years after the Crucifixion, I pro-
ceeded to inquire what light was thrown upon it
by references in Talinudic writings, at the same time
describing the earliest recorded intercourse between
Jewish Teachers and Christians. By the side of
this, there was a second, and, as running parallel
to the first, a confirmatory line of evidence from
witnesses, not only independent, but hostile. Here
it has been sought to ascertain, on the one hand, the
full import of the account given by Josephus of
John the Baptist, which is generally admitted to
be genuine; and, on the other, what light the well-
known Epistle of Pliny the Younger about the
Christians reflects upon the observances and the un-
derlying belief of the Early Church. While thus the
testimony of Josephus was seen to flash light upon
the beginning of Christianity, that of Pliny reflected
it back to about the year '80 or 90 of our era, the
intermediate period say, from about 60 of our era
being covered by what is admitted to have been
the universal tradition of the Primitive Church.
Having thus secured my position in front, I also
endeavoured to establish it in the rear, by an ex-,
animation of -the theories of recent criticism in regard
PREFACE.
to the structure and order of the Old Testament,
more especially of the Pentateuch legislation and
the historical books, for the purpose of vindicating
the Mosaic authorship of that legislation, and its
accordance with the notices in the historical books. 1
Here an account was first given (in Lecture VIE.)
of the history and progress of recent criticism of
the Pentateuch, from its inception to the present
time, together with certain general objections to
the latest theory of Wellhausen, and an indication
of the wide-reaching sequences to which such views
would lead. Next (in Lecture VIII.), the theory
of Wellhausen was examined more in detail. The
general position on our side of the question having
been indicated, it was sought to show, by an analysis
of the condition of Israel during the course of its
o
history, that the Mosaic authorship of the Penta-
teuch legislation is accordant with the notices in
the historical books of the Old Testament. Then
the theory of our opponents was further combated,
first, by certain fundamental objections to it, alike
in principle and in detail ; secondly, by some argu-
ments intended to show the primitive and Mosaic
character of the legislation and institutions of the
Lectures VII. and VHI.
PREFACE. XV
Pentateuch ; and, lastly, by a consideration of what,
from an historical point of view, we should have
expected to find or else not to find in the
Pentateuch, if its date and construction had been
as modern negative criticism asserts. The argu-
ments in these respects are supported and supple-
mented by two longer Notes (at the end of Lecture
Yin.), and by two Appendices, embodying chiefly
the results of the critical labours of some German
scholars. The second Note to Lecture VIII. will
be found of great interest and importance to the
critical student, giving, as it does, a revised list of
the passages by which Dr. Hoffmann has proved
that Ezekiel had before him, and had quoted from,
those portions of the Pentateuch, the publication
of which Wellhausen ascribes to the time of Ezra.
Similarly, Appendix II. furnishes an abstract of the
summary of Kleinert, giving a general analysis of the
Pentateuch ; stating its own witness, and that of the
other parts of the Old Testament, to its composition ;
the various phases through which recent Pentateuch
criticism has passed, and the reasons by which it
is supported ; also an enumeration of the passages
which are supposed to form what is regarded as
the latest portion of the Pentateuch ; and, finally,
XVI PREFACE.
an account of some of the modifications which the
Rabbis found it necessary to introduce in that part
of the legislation, in order to adapt it to the practical
requirements of later times,
After this detailed statement only a brief account
appears necessary of the general argument followed
in these Lectures. At the outset, it was felt that
no good purpose could be served by endeavouring
once more to follow the line of reasoning which
previous lecturers had so ably and learnedly traced.
Besides, the general position taken as to the relation
between Prophecy and prophecies, between fulfilment
and prediction, and as to the order in which they
should be studied, forbade any such attempt on my
part. On the other hand, I wished, first, to study
anew, and clearly to define, the points just men-
tioned, and then to trace the history of the great
Messianic hope in the Old Testament, through all
its stages, from its inception in the Paradise-promise
to the last prophetic announcement by John the
Baptist. Thus, 'Prophecy and History in relation
to the Messiah ' was to form the subject of the
course. In pursuance .of this, the first Lecture
is intended to indicate the general ground taken
up ; tracing the origin of Christianity to the teach-
PREFACE. xvii
ing of the Old Testament, and showing that the
great Messianic hope, of which Jesus presented the
realisation, could not have originated in His time,
nor close to it, nor yet in the centuries which had
elapsed since the return from the Exile. Lecture II.
carries the argument a step further, by showing that
4 the Kingdom of God ' had been the leading idea
throughout the whole Old Testament. At the same
time, the form in which prophecy of old was pre-
sented to successive generations, and the relation
between prophecy and fulfilment, are discussed, while
the character of prophetism is defined, and the
development of heathenism by the side of Israel,
and the ideal destiny of the latter, are traced. In a
Note appended to Lecture IE. the ordinary interpre-
tation of Genesis xii. 3 is defended against the
criticism of Professor Kuenen. Lecture HI. esta-
blishes the position, that the ISFew Testament presents
Christ as the fulfilment of Old Testament prophecy,
by showing that this is borne out by unquestioned
Christian, and by most important Jewish and hea-
then testimony (the Eabbis, Josephus, Pliny). Lec-
ture IV. defines and lays down some fundamental
principles in regard to ' prophecy ' and ' fulfilment,'
and discusses certain special prophecies. It also
a
xviii PREFACE.
explains the Biblical terms applied to the prophets,
and the functions of 'the sons of the prophets ; '
and, lastly, refers to some prophecies in the New
Testament Lecture Y. distinguishes between pro-
phetism and heathen divination ; exhibits the moral
element in prophecy ; and discusses the value of the
two canons which the Old Testament furnishes for
distinguishing the true from the false prophet. Lec-
ture VI. treats both of the progressive character
of prophecy, and of the spiritual element in it, and
shows how both prophecy and the Old Testament
as a whole point beyond themselves to a spiritual
fulfilment in the Kingdom of God marking also the
development dnring the different stages of the his-
tory of Israel, to the fulfilment in Christ. Lectures
YII. and YIIL are devoted to a defence of the views
previously set forth concerning the Old Testament,
and contain an examination of recent negative criti-
cism, in regard to the Pentateuch and the historical
books. Lecture IX. resumes the history of the
Messianic idea. It discusses the general character
of the post-exilian literature, and gives an analysis
of the Apocrypha and of their teaching, of the new
Hellenist direction, and of the bearing of ah 1 on the
Messianic hope. A doctrinal and critical comparison
x
is also made between the Apocrypha and the Old
Testament, and the points of difference are marked
and explained. Li Lecture X. the various movements
of Jewish national life are traced in their bearing
on the Messianic idea especially the ' Nationalist '
movement, of which, in a certain sense, the so-
called Pseudepigraphic writings may be regarded
as the religious literature. Lecture XI. gives an
account and analysis of these Pseudepigraphic writ-
ings, marking especially their teaching concerning
the Messiah and Messianic times. Lastly, Lecture-
"XTT. sets forth the last stage in Messianic prophecy
the mission and preaching of John the Baptist, and
the fahihnent of all prophecy in Jesus the Messiah
To this analysis of the general argument, little of
a personal character requires to be added. The liter-
ature of the subject has been sufficiently indicated
in the foot-notes ; it is not so large as to have made
a special enumeration necessary at the beginning
of this Yolume. For obvious reasons I have, so far
as possible, avoided all reference to living English
writers, whether on one or the other side of the
questions treated Lastly as regards the manner
in which the subject has been treated in this book,
every writer must be fully conscious, and, where the
XX PREFACE.
highest truth is concerned, painfully sensiblej ol
shortcomings in his attempt to realise the ideal
which he had set before himself. In the present
instance there were special difficulties- first, as
already stated, from the form of these Lectures, and
the space to which they were necessarily confined,
which prevented that more full discussion which, in
some parts, I could have desired. Besides this, I must
mention at least one other disadvantage under which
I laboured. From the circumstance that this course
of Lectures not only extended over four years, but
that the Lectures in each year had to be delivered
at periods widely apart, occasional repetitions of the
argument could not be avoided.
That the statement and defence of views so
widely differing from what may be described as the
current of modern criticism, may call forth strong,
perhaps even violent, contradiction, I must be pre-
pared to find. This only will I say, that, within the.
conditions prescribed by this course, I have earnestly
sought to set forth what I believe to be the truth of
Revelation concerning Jesus the Messiah, as the ful-
filment of Old Testament prophecy, and the hope of
Israel in all ages. To Him I would now commend
this volume on its way to its unknown readers. As
PREFACE. XXI
the motto for it I would fain choose the opening
sentence with which the first Gospel introduces the
history, and on which it grounds the Messianic
claims, of Jesus : .BijSXos yevecrecus 'Irjcrov Xptcrrou,
viov Ja/3tS, viov 'A/Spadf*. And as my concluding
words, I would transcribe these of the Yenerable
Bede: 'Si autem Moyses et prophetae de Ohristo
locuti sunt, et eum per passionem in gloriam in-
traturum prsedixerunt, quomodo gloriatur se esse
Christianum, qui neque qualiter Scripture ad Chris-
tum pertineant, investigat ; neque ad gloriarn, quam
cum Ohristo habere cupit, per passionem attingere
desiderat?'
ALFRED EDERSHEIM.
8BRADHOBB ROAD, OXFOBDI
January 6, 1885.
CONTENTS.
UOTUHB
L ON THB ORIGIN OT CHRISTIANITY IN THE OLD TESTA-
MENT f I 1
IL ON THE KINGDOM OF GOD AS THE LEADING IDEA OF THE
OED TESTAMENT, AND ON CERTAIN RECENT OETTICISM:
OONCEBN1N& THE ARRANGEMENT AND DATE OF THB
CANON 23
HI. THE FAITH AND BITES OP THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH ABB
CONFIRMED BY INDTJBIXABIB CHRISTIAN, AND BY Itt-
PORTANT NON-CHRISTIAN EVIDENCE .68
IV. ON BOMB FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES REQAEDIN& THB
STUDY OP PROPHECY AND ns FULFILMENT, TOOETHEB
WITH REMARKS ON CERTAIN SPECIAL PROPHECIES . 102
V. ON PROPHBTISM AND HEATHEN DIVINATION, THE MORAL
ELEMENT IN OLD TESTAMENT PROPHECY, AND THE
BIBLICAL CANONS FOR, DisuNGmssiNa THE TRUE FROM
THE FALSE PROPHET , . 137
VI. ON THE SPIRITUAL ELEMENT IN PROPHECY: THB OLD
TESTAMENT POINTED TO A SPIRITUAL FULFILMENT IN
THE KINGDOM op GOD ..... 160
VTL ON THE HISTORY OP THT; RECENT CRITICISM OP THB
PENTATEUCH, AND ON SOME DIFFICULTIES CONNECTED
mm ITS EESULTS , , , 191
XXIV CONTENTS.
LECTURE
YQL SOME ITIETHEB CONSIDERATIONS REGABDnra THE Oox-
POSITION AND DATE OP THE PENTATEUCH . . 280
IX. THE MESSIANIC IDEA IN THE LATER STAGES OF ISBAEL'S
HTRIORY: THE A.POCRYPHA AND THEIE RELATION TO
THE PAST AND THE FUTURE .... 289
X. Off THE DIFFERENT MOVEMENTS OP NATIONAL LlFE HT
PALESTINE IN THEIK BEARING ON THE MESSIANIC
IDEA; ON THE NATIONALIST MOVEMENT IN ITS CON-
NECTION "WITH PSETTDEPIGRAPHIC LITERATURE ; THE
PSEUDEPIGRAPHA, AND THEIE OHABACTEB . . 816
XL ANALYSIS AND CONTENTS OF THE PSETTDEPIQEAPHIO
WHITINGS ; THEIB TEACHING CONCERNING THE MESSIAH
AND MESSIANIC TIMES . . . . . 337
XII. THE LAST STAGE IN MESSIANIC PROPHECY: JOHN itna
BAPTIST ; HIS CHARACTER AND PBEAOHOIQ. THB Fuir
us CHRIST . . . 853
APPENDICES.
APPENDIX
L EICHHORN'S ARRANGEMENT OF GENESIB . . 871
IL ANALYSIS OP THE PENTATEUCH AND OP us CBEEICIISM . 874
Jbr 0be more Oemanlo) 'PrieeWtoder,*
THE
RISE OF CHRISTIANITY.
LECTUEE I.
ON THE ORIGIN OF CHRISTIANITY IN THE OLD TESTAMENT.
What think ye of the Christ ? Whose Son is He ?
ST. MATT. xxii. 43.
IT requires little consideration to convince us that
the question which we propose to discuss in the
present course of Lectures, is, from the religious
point of view, of supreme interest and importance.
In truth, it concerns no less than the very origin of
Christianity. Passing "beyond the modifications and
development which contact with the varied culture
of many nations or outward events have effected in
the course of these eighteen centuries ; passing also
through the obscurity around the early age of Chris-
tianity, due to insufficient or inexact records, we can
happily reach clearer light. We know the period of
the rise of Christianity, and, as it seems to me, we
can better understand its connection with that which
preceded its birth than with that which followed it,
B
2 " PROPHECY AND HISTOEY. LECT. I.
and surrounded its infancy. Accordingly, it is in tHs
manner that we here propose to study its origin :
inquiring into its connection with that which had
gone before, and of which it is the outcome, rather
than treading our uncertain steps through the intri-
cate mazes of often dubious tradition and apparently
conflicting evidence up to the circumstances of its
birth. . Thus, the great question before us is this :
Christianity, whence is it ? The answer will in mea-
sure also decide that other : Christianity, what is it,
divine or human ; a revelation from heaven, or the
outcome of determining circumstances ? And its
issue: is it the Church Universal, or only a new
school of thought?
The difference to which we have referred as
regards the mode of conducting our inquiry into the
origin of Christianity, is the necessary sequence of
the standpoint which we occupy in it, and connected
with the results which we have in view. From
earnest times the historical Church has traced its
origin to that which had preceded it. Accordingly
it has declared that Christianity was not indeed the
counterpart, but the unfolding and the fulfilment of
the Old Testament, and it has claimed that the
Church was the true Israel of God. It has regarded
the whole history of Israel as big with the promise
of the world's salvation, and its institutions and pro-
mises as pointing to the establishment of a universal
LEOT. i. METHOD OP INVESTIGATION. 3
kingdom of God upon earth by means of the Messiah.
Hence it has set forth, in no hesitating language, that
there is unity, continuity, and progress in the teaching
of the Old Testament, and that all in it is prophetic 3
of the Christ. As against this view, which admit-
tedly is both grand in its conception and logically
consistent in its application, a certain school of
modern criticism has followed a different mode of
inquiry into the origin of the Church, and reached
almost opposite results. Seeking to track the stream
upwards, it has been declared that Christianity, as
at present we know it, has been shaped by the cir-
cumstances, the people, and the culture with which
on its introduction it was brought into contact ; that
its origins were very simple, and due to natural, local
and temporary causes ; in fact, that it is the result of a
gradual accretion of different elements, all historically
explicable, around a small and not very important
nucleus of facts.
The theory just indicated has, it must be con-
fessed, many attractions. It promises to destroy or
supersede the miraculous by tracing to the operation
of ordinary causes what otherwise would seem due
to direct Divine agency, finding for it what is called
' a rational explanation,' that is, one level with our
ordinary perceptions. And the contention is the
1 I am here using the term in the ordinary sense, not in that which
will be explained in the sequel.
B 2
4 PKOPHECY AND HISTOEY. IBCT, I.
more important since the Church view of the origin
of Christianity implies, if correct, also unquestionable
inferences about the Divine character of the Old
Testament. Moreover, the new view is in seeming
accordance with the general spirit of modern inves-
tigation, which everywhere discards preconceived
purpose and unity of design, and explains that
which is by the gradual operation of inherent
forces, adapting themselves under the influence of
surrounding circumstances. Lastly, it has the ad-
vantage of being set forth by writers not only of
acknowledged learning, but of exceeding skill in
pleading their case. By the weight of their autho-
rity, they too often set forth as undoubted results
of critical research what others, even of their own
school, have called in question, and which therefore,
on any theory, cannot be grounded on indubitable
or even clear evidence. Still more frequently, wide-
reaching conclusions have been reared on what, after
all, is a very narrow basis of facts ; most weighty con-
siderations on the other side being either overlooked
or ignored. In this manner it has become possible to
construct a wholly new theory of the genesis of the
Old and New Testament which presents the attrac-
tion of unity and consistency, is capable of re-
moving all difficulties, whether real or suggested,
and, in fact, is devised to meet them. But strange as
it may seem, it is this very facility of explaining and
lid. I. CHRISTlAMTf APPEALED TO EXISTING HOPE. 5
arranging everything which awakens our doubt and
suspicion. In real life things do not move in precisely
straight or rectangular lines, nor yet with the order
and regularity of a tale. Many and varied influences
are always at work, and the theory which professes
precisely to fit, and exactly to explain, all phenomena
though they had to be reconstructed for the purpose,
resembles rather the invention of a speculator than
the observed course of history. 1
Happily we shall avoid in our present inquiry all
speculation, whether critical or metaphysical, seeking
to answer what in the first place is an historical ques-
tion by means of historical investigation. As a pre-
liminary step, we purpose in the present Lecture to
make it clear that the New Testament really points
back to the Old. To put it more precisely : we hold
that Christianity in its origin appealed to an existing
state of expectancy, which was the outcome of a
previous development ; and further, that those ideas
and hopes of which it professed to be the fulfilment
had not first sprung up in the immediately preceding
period that is, in the centuries between the return
from the Babylonish exile and the Birth of Christ
1 It is exceedingly interesting to me to find that a distinguished critic
belonging to a very different school (Professor Noldeke) has similarly
expressed his objection to the new arrangement of the Pentateuch, proposed
by Wellhausen. He denies any ' development along- a straight line.'
(' In der gesetzlichen Litteratur ist keine geradlinige Entwickelung zu
erkennen.') Oomp. Herzog, Real-Encyld., 2nd edition, vol. xi. p. 444..
6 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. LEOT. i.
but stretched back through the whole course of
Old Testament teaching.
If we were to view the introduction of Christianity
into Palestine, and its spread throughout the heathen
world, as an isolated fact, it would seem simply and
absolutely inexplicable. For it cannot be conceived
that One should have arisen and claimed to be the
Messiah ; appealed in confirmation to Moses and the
prophets ; professed to institute a kingdom of God
upon earth ; and in so doing gained the ear of the
multitude and gathered devoted disciples ; that, more-
over, the temporal and spiritual rulers of Israel should
have entered into controversy with Him, not as to
the foundation, but merely as to the justice of His
claims : and yet that all this should have represented
an entirely new movement. "We would at least have
expected some reference to this circumstance. In
thus describing in general outline what Christ pro-
fessed, did, and experienced, I am not asserting what
even the most negative criticism will deny. For even
if we were to eliminate from our Synoptic Gospels any
part that is called in 'question by the most extreme
criticism, and banish the fourth Gospel to the end of
the second century, regarding it as a tissue of eccle-
siastical symbolism sufficient would still remain to
establish this position, that Christ professed to be the
Old Testament Messiah and to bring the Kingdom of
God ; that He gathered adherents ; and that the justice
EROT. i. EVIDENCE OP THE MESSIANIC HOPE. 7
of His claims was resisted by the Jewish authorities ;
while at the same time the fact of a Messiahship, and
the expectation of a Kingdom of God, were never
called in question. I am warranted in going a
step farther and saying, that the unquestioned
facts in the Gospel history not only imply the ex-
istence of Messianic ideas and expectations, but their
depth and intenseness. Only such a state of feeling
could explain how One Who taught such evidently
unwelcome doctrine was so widely listened to and
followed. And the argument as to this Messianic ex-
pectancy at the time would only become stronger in
measure as we denied the claims of Jesus. For, if
even the minimum of such ideas had been a novelty
if no Messianic expectations existed at the time^
surely the maximum as formulated by Jesus, and so
opposed to Jewish prejudices, could never have been
asserted.
All this seems almost self-evident. Yet, to make
sure of our position, let me here remind you of what
may be termed the most superficial, as certainly they
are the least questionable, facts in the Gospel history.
Surely, the crowds which from all parts of the
country, and from all classes of society, flocked to
the preparatory preaching of the Baptist, and sub-
mitted to the rite which he introduced, as not only
the New Testament but Josephus attests, at least
indicate that the proclamation of the Ejngddm of
8 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. xatn. t.
God had wakened an echo throughout the land.
And again, as we watch the multitudes which every-
where followed the preaching of Jesus ; remember
how they would fain have proclaimed Him King ;
and how even at the close of His ministry they greeted
Him with Hosannas at His entry into Jerusalem,
and this in face of the danger threatening .them in
such a movement from the presence of one so anti-
Jewish and so suspicious as Pilate, we cannot but
feel convinced not only of the existence, but of the
intenseness, of the Messianic hope among the people
at large.
It is, indeed, true that all such ideas and hopes are
influenced, at least in their intensity and expression,
by the circumstances of the time. They gain in
depth and earnestness in proportion to the national
abasement and suffering. Never did the Messianic
hopes of the inspired Prophets rise higher; never
was their faith wider in its range, or brighter in its
glow ; never their utterance of it more passionately
assured, than when Israel had sunk to the lowest
stage of outward depression. Because the conviction
of the prophets and of Israel was so unshakably
firm as regarded the glorious future, therefore it was
that in such times they most deeply felt and most
earnestly expressed the need of fleeing into the strong
refuge of a certain future, the realising expectancy
of which put a song into their mouth in the night
IEOI. t. HOPE iNTENSlilED IN SUFFERING. 9
time. So also was it in the long centuries of dis-
appointment, and of apparently increasing unlikeli-
hood that the Hope of Israel should ever become a
Beality, that the Apocalyptic visions of the Pseudepi-
graphic writers gained in vividness and realism of
colouring. Similarly, the most pathetically expectant
elegies of mediaeval Eabbinism date from the times
o
of persecution. In truth it scarcely seems exaggera-
tion to say, that throughout the history of Israel we
can trace the times of bitterest sorrows by their
brightest Messianic expectations, as if that golden
harvest waved richest where the ploughshare had
drawn the furrows deepest, and the precious seed
been watered by blood and tears. And so the
Talmud connects the coming of the Messiah with
the time of bitterest woes, when Galilee would
be laid waste, and the very mangers turned into
coffins, when war and famine had desolated the
land, and all righteousness and truth disappeared. 1
Similarly, the mystic Midrash 2 sees in the dove
in the clefts of the rocks, to whom comes the
call, * Let me hear thy voice,' a picture of Israel as,
fleeing before the hawk, it descries, in the rock-
cleft, a serpent, and in agony of fear and distress
beats its wings and raises piteous cries, which presently
bring it the help and deliverance of its Lord. But
this intensification of the Messianic hope in times
1 Sanh 97 o. z On Cant. ii. 14.
10 PKOPHECY AND HISTOETT. tECl. r.
when national glory seemed farthest removed, is only
another evidence of the universality and depth of
the Messianic hope. And if final proof were re-
quired of its existence, it is surely to be found in
the circumstance that such hopes were independent of
Jesus of Nazareth ; that they equally attached them-
selves to false Messiahs, of whom not less than about
sixty are mentioned, and who, despite the absurdity
of their pretensions, carried after them such large
numbers of the people ; and, in the case of so clumsy
an impostor as Bar Kokhba, even some of the lead-
ing Kabbis, kindling fanaticism to the extent of a
conflict which severely tasked the resources of im-
perial Eome. Nay, is it not so that this hope has
survived eighteen centuries, not only of bitter perse-
cution, but of chilling disappointment ? Though dis-
owned by the nerveless rationalism of modern Jews,
it kindles up in every service of the Synagogue ; it
flings its many-coloured light over every product of
Eabbinic literature ; and as year by year each family
of the banished gathers around the Paschal table,
the memorial of Israel's birth-night and first deliver-
ance, it still rises in the impassioned plaintive cry
of mingled sorrow and longing which rings into the
desolate silence of these many centuries : ' This year
here next year in Jerusalem ! '
A hope so wide-reaching, so intense and endur-
ing cannot, I submit, have been the outcome of one
1ECT. I.
BEFORE THE CLOSE OF THE CANON. 11
particular phase in the history of the people. Its
roots must have struck far deeper than one period of
the nation's life ; it must be the innermost meaning
of their history, the final expression of that long
course of teaching in the Law and in the Prophets
which, all unconsciously to themselves, has become
the very life-blood of Israel's faith.
But on a point of such importance we are not left
to general inferences. Even at this preliminary stage
of our inquiry, we can appeal to unquestionable evi-
dence that the ideas and hopes which Jesus of Naza-
reth professed to realise did not arise at His period,
nor yet close to it. More than this, we are prepared
to show grounds for maintaining that the great Mes-
sianic expectation did not originate in the period
between the close of the Old Testament Canon and
the Birth of Christ. In such case the plain inference
would be, that it must be traced up to the Old Testa-
ment itself, in the course of whose teaching we must
seek its origin, growth, and gradual development.
In regard to the first point just referred to, it
may, I think, be fairly argued, that if the idea of the
Messiah and His kingdom had originated in the period
of Christ, if indeed it had been new, the teaching of
Jesus would have either reflected this, at least in its
main features, or else indicated and vindicated the
fact and the grounds of divergence from the past.
In this respect it is most significant, that while Christ.
12 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. UJCT. f.
so emphatically accentuated the differences between
His own and the teaching of the Pharisees, as re-
garded the most important matters of the Law, He
never referred to any such as subsisting between His
own and the Messianic ideas of his contemporaries
at least, in their general conception. On the con-
trary, all implies that, so far from these Messianic ex-
pectations first emerging at or near that period, they
had been long existing, and indeed had lost their
definiteness in a more vague and general expectancy
which assumed the colouring of the times. A similar
inference conies to us from a consideration of the
preparatory Messianic announcement by the Baptist,
the questions which it elicited, and the indefinite form
of his answers. It represents a very strong but a
general expectancy, rather than such definite ex-
pectations as one would associate with their recent
origination. On the other hand, it is quite evident
that Jesus of Nazareth, as He is presented to
us in the Gospel history, did not meet the special
form which the Messianic thiriking of His contem-
poraries had taken, when called upon to assume a
concrete form in accordance with the general direc-
tion of the time. For not only did they reject His
teaching, denounce Him as an impostor, and crucify
Him as a blasphemer, but even His own disciples
and followers neither anticipated nor fully understood,
in many respects even misunderstood, His doctrine,
I. IN WHAT SENSE CHRIST WAS OF HIS TIME. 13
were utterly unprepared for His death, and had no
expectation of His resurrection. In other words, each
of the three great elements in His history came as a
surprise upon them.
Whatever outward agreement may therefore be
traced between the sayings of Christ and contem-
porary thought, this at least is quite evident, that He
did not embody the precise Messianic ideal of His
time. And here we must observe an important dis-
tinction. In one sense Jesus Christ certainly was a
man of His time : He spoke the language of His time,
and He addressed Himself by word and deed to the
men, the ideas, and the circumstances of His time.
Had it been otherwise, He would not have been
an historical personage, nor could He have been a
true Christ. The more closely therefore we trace
the features of His time in His words and actions, in
the people introduced on the stage of the Gospel
history, and in the general mise en scene, the more
clearly do we prove the general historical truthful-
ness of the narrative that it is true to the time.
But in another and higher sense Jesus Christ was
not the man of His time, spake not, acted not, aimed
not, as they ; and hence the great body of the people
rejected, denounced, and crucified, while even His
own so often misunderstood and were surprised by
Him.
What has just been stated naturally leads to the
14 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. ILEOT. i.
last point in our present inquiry. It has been shown
that the Messianic idea could- not have originated
in the time of Jesus Christ, nor presumably in that
immediately preceding. But between the time of
Jesus Christ and the close of the Old Testament
Canon or, to avoid controversy, let us say the time
of Ezra roughly speaking, four and a half centuries
intervened. Could it be that the great hope of Israel
had sprung up during any part of the troubled his-
tory of that period? Without at present entering
into detailed examination, sufficient reasons can be
shown to make this the most unlikely hypothesis.
For,
First. It is impossible, to believe that such a hope
could have newly sprung up without leaving at least
some mark of its origin, and some trace of its growth
in the history and literature of the time. Whatever
darkness may rest on certain aspects in the develop-
ment of thought and religion at that period, espe-
cially at the beginning of it, or on such questions as
the institution of the so-called ' Great Synagogue,'
or the influence and development of the new direc-
tion of external legalism, or of the national and anti-
Grecian party, yet all these tendencies are marked
in the history and literature of that period. And it
seems unthinkable that the one great, the all-domi-
nant idea in the religion of Israel, the hope of a
Jewish Messiah-King, who would bear rule over a
LECT. i. OEIGIN OF THE MESSIANIC IDEA. 15
world converted to God, should have originated with-
out one trace of its birth and gradual development.
But as a matter of fact there is not in the history, nor
yet in the literature of that period any appearance
of a small commencement, a growth, or a gradual
development of the Messianic idea, such as would be
requisite on the theory in question. On the other
hand, it deserves special notice that such a develop-
ment is very clearly traceable throughout the Canon
of the Old Testament, and that pari passu with the
progress of Israel's history. It is needless to say
that this tells its own most important lesson, both
as regards the internal unity of the Old Testa-
ment and the origin and development of the Mes-
sianic idea. But at present we are only so far
concerned with it as to mark that no such pro-
gression appears either in Apocryphal, Pseudepi-
graphic, Alexandrian, or Eabbinic literature, In
some respects, indeed, there is retrogression rather
than progression in this matter, and this not only
in the writings of Philo, where the Messianic idea is,
so to speak, sublimated into generalities, but in the
Apocrypha, where it is only obscurely referred to.
But alike in the one case and in the other, not only
is its existence implied, but a previous fuller deve-
lopment of it.
As regards Eabbinic literature, it is universally
known that any references to the great Messianic
16 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. LECT. i.
hope of Israel occurring in its pages appear in the
most developed form. The only question, therefore,
can be in reference to that special kind of literature
which bears the name of Pseudepigraphic "Writings/
and which may in general be described as Apoca-
lyptic in character. Naturally we expect to find the
Messianic hope most fully expressed in such works.
But although we mark variety and addition of detail
in the various books, there is no trace of any develop-
ment in the underlying conception of the Messiah
and His kingdom. As a crucial instance we may
here refer to the Book of Daniel, the authorship and
date of which are in controversy. According to the
testimony of the Church, the Book of Daniel or at
least the greater portion of it dates from the time
of the Exile ; according to a large section of modern
critics, from about that of Antiochus Epiphanes
(175-164 B.C.). In the one case it would belong to
the Biblical, in the other to the Pseudepigraphic
writings. We have our own decided convictions ^on
this point. But for the present argument it mat-
ters not which of the two views is the correct one.
Clearly in the Book of Daniel we have the idea of
the Messiah and His kingdom in its full development.
1 The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, in contradistinction to the Apo-
crypha, are a series of spurious writings mostly professing to be derived
from Old Testament personages or else dealing with Old Testament events,
"but all of them Apocalyptic, though in varying measure, and "bearing
distinctly, though in different degree, on the Messianic Kingdom. For
their fuller characterisation and enumeration, see Lecture X.
. I. THE MESSIANIC HOPE DAVlDia 17
If the Book of Daniel belongs to the Canon, then the
idea must have existed fully developed in Biblical
times ; if, on the contrary, it should be regarded as
the earliest of the Pseudepigraphic writings, it affords
undoubted evidence that the Messianic idea did not
gradually develop, but existed in its fullest form in
the earliest literary monument of that class. But we
can go back farther than this. For,
Secondly. If the Messianic hope had sprung up
during or immediately after the exile, we should
scarcely have expected it to cluster round the House
of David, nor to centre in the ' Son of David.'
For nothing is more marked than the decadence
and almost disappearance of the House of David
j$
1 in that period. A national hope of this kind
I could scarcely have sprung up when the royalty
of David was not only matter of the past, but
when its restoration was comparatively so little
thought of or desired, that the descendants of the
Davidic house seem in great measure to have become
lost in the mass of the people. And the argument
becomes all the stronger as we notice how, with the
lapse of time, the Davidic line became increasingly an
historical remembrance or a theological idea, rather
than a present power or reality. Throughout the
Old Testament Davidic descent is always the most
prominent element in all Messianic pictures, while
in later writings it recedes into the background, as
c
18 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. : LBOT. i.
-somethiiiag in the long past which must be brought
{forth anew. In this respect, also, it is characteristic
that the name ' Son of David ' was the most distinc-
tive title claimed by, and given to Jesus, while in the
<case of all spurious Messianic movements this occupied
only a subordinate, if any, place.
Thirdly. We may press the argument yet one
step farther, and express a strong doubt whether,
if this hope had originated in the post-exilian period,
it would have connected itself with any distinctly
monarchic aspirations. The general genius of Judaism
is against it, and throughout the whole post-exilian
history and literature there is certainly not a trace
of any wish for the restoration of the old, or the
establishment of any new monarchy. This silence
is of itself significant. On the other hand, we have
on at least three critical occasions in the time of
Pompey, during the governorship of Gabinius
(about 66 B.C.), and after the death of Herod the
distinct expression of objections to monarchical rule
and of preference for an oligarchy as conformable to
ancient traditions. 1 And if it be supposed that such
objections mainly applied to the Herodian house, the
attentive student of that period cannot fail to observe
that the rapid change of public opinion in regard to
the Maccabees from that of unbounded popular en-
thusiasm to the extreme of general hatred may be
1 Jos. Ant. xiv. 3. 2 ; comp. xiv, 5. 4 ; War, ii. 6. 2.
LECT. I.
POST-EXILIAN HOPES. 19
dated from their permanent assumption of the royal
along with the high-priestly dignity. But, be this
as it may, the Davidic house and royalty at any rate
may be said to have disappeared from the horizon of
practical politics.
It were, indeed, an interesting speculation for
which the elements are not wholly wanting, to inquire
to what kind of personality the Messianic hope
would have attached itself if it had first originated
in the post-exilian period. Certainly not to a
scion of the Davidic house, probably not to any
king. The Messiah would have been a conqueror.
This was a political necessity, and in accordance
with national thought and ambition, not to speak
of the hope of the realisation of a grand contrast
between Israel's past and their future. The Messiah
would certainly have been a proud and avenging
conqueror, whose rule of the conquered would have
been anything but that of peace, liberty, and happi-
ness to them. But he would have been a conqueror
with whose administration the office of a Chief Eabbi
would have strangely blended. He would have been
first a Eabbi, then a conqueror, and then again a
Eabbi ; or his conquests would have been dictated and
shaped by the requirements of Eabbinisrn, and applied
and utilised in its service.
We remember that, according to the latest theory
which, at least for the present, finds most favour
c2
20 PHOPHECY AND HISTORY. t-Eci. 1.
on the Continent, if not among ourselves, the largest
and most important part of the Pentateuch, embra-
cing, roughly speaking, the sections from Ex. xxv. to
Numb, xxxvi., dates from after the Babylonish exile.
As containing the great body of the ritual laws and
ceremonial observances, it is called the ' Priest-
Codex,' and it is supposed to have been introduced by
the influence of the priesthood, and to mark in many
respects an entirely new departure in, and transforma-
tion of, the old Israelitish religion. 1 If the priesthood
had such power as to bring in a wholly new document,
which initiated a new direction, and if they could
gain for it the recognition, ever afterwards unques-
tioned, of forming the fundamental part of the ancient
legislation and religion of Israel a supposition suf-
ficiently exacting, and which would seem to require
the weightiest proofs we are surely warranted in
expecting that some mark of this tendency should
have appeared in that Messianic idea which formed
the great hope of the people, if it had originated at
that time. If they were able to transform the past
in the interest of the present, would they not have
exercised the same influence as regards the future ?
But here, as on so many other points, the theory
in question signally fails. The priestly element, which
is said to have transformed the Pentateuch legislation,
does not appear as in any way connected with the ideal
1 The Pentateuch question is discussed in subsequent Lectures.
T THE PEIEST-CODEX. 21
!
goal of Israel except from the Christian, theological
point of view of the ideal Priesthood of Christ. This,
surely, is a very strange phenomenon which demands
an explanation, whatever view may be taken of the
origin of the Messianic idea. If it originated in
strictly Old Testament times, those who could intro-
duce the Priest-Codex into the Mosaic legislation
would have had no difficulty in finding a place for
the expression of their views in connection with the
grand hope of Israel's religion ; and if it originated
in the exilian or immediately post-exilian period, these
views could scarcely have failed to impress themselves
upon it.
But, truth to say, this is only one of the historical
difficulties of the theory about the late origin of the
Priest-Codex. The great objection to it is, that,
while it explains certain phenomena in the past reli-
gious history of Israel at least, as these are presented
by the advocates of the theory it not only leaves
unaccounted for, but seems inconsistent with, the
whole subsequent religious development. And the
more carefully the grounds are examined in detail on
which the late origin of the ' Priest-Codex ' is inferred,
the more incompatible with the undoubted facts of
the subsequent history will the conclusions be found.
Not the origin of the idea of an exclusive central
place of worship, but the institution of synagogues
everywhere ; not drawing together ^ but expansion,
22 PBOPHEOY AND HISTORY. LECT. i.
and provision for the ' dispersed,' who not only were,
but, it must have been felt, would remain at any
rate, to Messianic times the majority of the people;
not privileges and rights for the priesthood, whom
the whole history shows to have been as an order an
uninfluential minority, shorn even of some of its
ancient prerogatives in short, -not Sacerdotalism but
Rabbinism : such was the outcome of the exilian and
post-exilian period. And although this transforma-
tion was in the first place necessarily carried out by
the priests and Levites, there can be no doubt that,
even in the case of Ezra, the title ' priest ' falls into
the background behind that of ' scribe,' 1 and that his
activity and tendency have been rightly indicated
when he is designated as ' the father of all the Mishnic
doctors.' 2
But, here we return from our digression: Kab-
binism, which is the true outcome of the post-exilian
period, is, in its inmost tendency, not only anti-
monarchical and anti-sacerdotal, but, strange as it
may sound, even anti-Messianic. The Eabbis found
Messianism,just as they found the Aaronic priesthood
and sacrifices ; and they adopted it. They were
patriotic and imaginative, and their Haggadists,
preachers, and mystics elaborated the idea with every
detail which legend, an unrestrained Eastern fancy,
or national pride, could suggest. But when we pass
1 Ezra vii.; Net. viii. 8 Otho, Lex, Rabb., p, 173.
r. RABBINISM AND THE MESSIANIG IDEA. 23
beneath the surface, we find that Babbinism does not
well know what to make of this doctrine ; that it is a
foreign element in it, which may be added to, but will
not amalgamate with, the system. The latter is a hard
and dry logical development of the Law to its utmost
sequences. Beyond the four corners of its reason-
ing, Babbinism acknowledges no authority whatever,
on earth be it priestly or royal or in heaven.
And when Babbi Eliezer appealed, and that success-
fully, in favour of his doctrines to the Voice from
Heaven (the so-called Bath Qol\ the assembled Babbis
were not silenced by it, but declared that, since the
Law had been given on Mount Sinai, it was 'not
in heaven ;' 1 to which, therefore, no appeal could be
made. Apart from its somewhat profane witticism,
this answer meant that there was finality about the
Law as interpreted by the Babbis by which even the
Almighty Himself was bound.
It certainly affords evidence, were such needed,
that Babbinism recognised no authority, not even
that of an audible voice from heaven, outside its own
hard and dry logic. The only place which the Mes-
sianic doctrine could hold in such a system was, that
it furnished hope of a temporal deliverance, or even
of the national supremacy of Israel, which would
make Babbinism dominant ; or else that it opened
the prospect of a new law. And this essential anta-
'l
* Deut. xxx. 12.
24 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. EBOI. I.
gonism between the Messianic idea as embodied by
Christ, and Eabbinism, explains the life and death
contest which from His first manifestation ensued
between Jesus of Nazareth and the leaders of His
people.
Briefly to sum up the conclusions to which the
foregoing reasoning points : Christianity in its origin
appealed to a great Messianic expectancy, the source
and spring of which must be sought not in the post-
exilian period, but is found in the Old Testament
itself. The whole Old Testament is prophetic. Its
special predictions form only a part, although an
organic part, of the prophetic Scriptures ; and all pro-
phecy points to the Kingdom of God and to the Mes-
siah as its King. The narrow boundaries of Judah and
Israel were to be enlarged so as to embrace all men,
and one King would reign in righteousness over a
ransomed world that would offer to Him its homage
of praise and service. All that had marred the moral
harmony of earth would be removed ; the universal
Fatherhood of Grod would become the birthright of
redeemed, pardoned, regenerated humanity ; and all
this blessing would centre in, and flow from, the
Person of the Messiah.
Such at least is the promise of the Old Testament
which the New Testament declares to have been ful-
filled in Christ Jesus. And if it were not so, then
surely can it 'never more be fulfilled. Eor not even
EECT. i. THE IDEA OF THE KINGDOM. 25
the most fanatic Jew would venture to assert, that
out of the Synagogue could now come to our world
a King reigning in righteousness, a Son of David, a
Branch of Jesse ; and that the present Synagogue
would so enlarge itself as to embrace in its bosom all
nations of the earth. And thus, unless the old hope
of the kingdom has been realised in Christianity, it
can never be realised at all. Then also is the Old
Testament itself false in its inmost principle, and false
the hope of humanity which it bears.
Or otherwise, if it be maintained that ours is not
the true meaning of these prophecies, but that they
pointed to a great Jewish King and a great Israel-
itish kingdom, to which all nations were to become
subject then, in such case, the Old Testament that
is, if we take it as seriously meaning what it says
could not be of (rod. If it had only nattered Jewish
national pride ; if . it had held out only the wretched
prospect of a victorious Jewish King, not one in
righteousness and peace ; if, instead of the universal
Fatherhood of God in Christ, it had only spoken of the
universal dominion of Israel over men then would
it not have brought good news, and be neither Divine
nor yet true. And so it still is, that the New Testa-
ment without the Old, and the Old Testament with-
N
out the New, is not possible. Novum Testamentum
in Vetere latet, Veins in Now patet. And so we all feel
it, when in our Christian services we not only sing
26 PROPHECY AND HISTOEY. ZECT. i.
the Psalter and read the Old Testament, as of present
application, but speak of Abraham as our fore-
father.' To compare the colourless, declamatory and
unspiritual ancient Accadian or Babylonian hyinn-
ology with the Psalms seems, even from the literary,
much more from the religious point of view, utterly
impossible. Conceive our highest spiritual aspira-
tions and our best services expressing themselves in
the language of these compositions, or of any possible
development of them ! No, the Old Testament ele-
ment could not in this nineteenth century have kept
its place in our theology and our worship, otherwise
than by an inherent fitness ; because the New Testa-
ment is the organic development and completion of
the Old.
And on this Advent Sunday 1 we realise all this
anew. In the winter's gloom the leafless trees
stretch their bared arms towards the coming spring ;
and as they sway in the winter's storm we seem
to hear their cry for the new light and the new
life. So in the world's Advent-time did the leafless
tree of heathenism stretch its arms, in unconscious
longing and with tin-understood moaning, towards
where the Sun of Eighteousness was to rise in the
Golden East. He has risen, and with healing in His
wings. Anon it will be Christmas on our earth.
Heaven's choirs greeted its first coming with pro-
> This Lecture was delivered on the first Sunday in Advent, 1880.
LECT. i. THE WORLD'S ADVENT-TIME. 27
phetic jubilee; and, in happy type, did the worship of
Jewish shepherds and the votive offerings of heathen
sages mingle their homage with angelic song 'For
unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given : and
the government shall be upon his shoulder.' 1
NOTE.
In connection "with what has been said at pp. 17, 18 about the
gradual fading out of religious thought as attaching to the Davidic
line, -we mark the manner in which it is referred to in the
'Wisdom of the Son of Sirach' (Ecclus.). Generally, its praise
falls far below that of the Aaronic line. But, specifically, we
notice that in Ecclus. xlv. 25 we read that the Divine promise to
David is ' the inheritance of the King from son to son only '
(vlov tZ, vlov fiovov), while that of Aaron is ' to his seed ' that is,
as we understand it: the direct Davidic line having probably
become extinguished with Zerubbabel, the promise to David is
now declared to have only applied to his direct line : ' from son to
son only,' while that to Aaron extended in any line : ' to his seed,'
generally. (See Geiger in vol. xii. of the Zeitschr. d. deutsch.
Morgenland. Gesellsch., p. 540).
1 Is. ix, 6.
28 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. LECI n.
LECTUEE n.
ON THE KINGDOM OF GOD AS THE LEADING IDEA OF THE OLD
TESTAMENT, AND ON CERTAIN EECENT CRITICISM CONCERN-
ING THE ARRANGEMENT AND DATE OF THE CANON.
Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, "We have found Him of
whom Moses in the law, and the prophets 5 did write, Jesus of Nazareth,
the son of Joseph. ST. JOHN i 45.
APAET from its intrinsic interest and its connection
with the narrative of which it forms an episode, this
answer of Philip to Nathanael has an important
bearing on our present inquiry. It expresses the
conclusions at which we have arrived in our former
Lecture, and so shows that we have not misrepre-
sented the meaning of the New Testament in saying
that it looked back for its origin to the Old Testament.
Even in the Fourth Gospel, which a certain school
of critics regards as anything but a Judaic docu-
ment, the early disciples present the claims of Jesus
as of Him, * of whom Moses in the Law, and the
Prophets did write.' But although the New Testa-
ment writers, and, as we may now say, the Jewish
people generally, founded their Messianic expectancy
on the Old Testament, it is another question whether,
in so doing, they rightly understood its meaning.
n. THE MEANING OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 29
In other words, does the Old Testament really em-
body such a hope of a universal spiritual kingdom
of God upon earth through the Messiah, as the New
Testament writers, rightly or wrongly, saw fulfilled
in Jesus of Nazareth ; or is this view of the Old
Testament only a later gloss put upon it by Chris-
tianity? This must be the subject of our next
inquiry.
In one respect we might here content ourselves
with appealing to the facts established in the prece-
ding Lecture. Evidently the Messianic hope existed
at the time of Christ, and that not only among one
section, party, or school, but among all classes,
thoroughgoing Sadducees perhaps excepted. We
might even go farther and assert that the highest
springs of the great Nationalist movement, which
finally issued in the war with Rome, lay not so much
in the aspirations of patriotism and love of indepen-
dence, as in a misunderstanding and misapplication of
the Messianic expectancy. And in proof we might
even appeal to the circumstance that some of the
disciples of Jesus, notably * Simon the Zealot,' seem
originally to have belonged to the Nationalist party,
the focus of which was in" Galilee. But apart from
this, we have also direct evidence, that not only the
New Testament writers and later Eabbis, but the people
generally, traced the Messianic expectation to the
teaching of the Old Testament. Even so Unscrupu-
30 PEOPHECY AND HISTORY. SECT, n.
Ions a partisan as Josephus can in this instance be
cited as a witness on our side, whose testimony is the
more important for the manifest reluctance and in-
directness with which, in works intended for Eoman
readers, he refers to the Messianic hope. I am not
here thinking of the controverted passage about
Christ, 1 but of such (among other) allusions to Mes-
sianic prophecies in the Old Testament, as when
referring to the predictions of Balaam he infers from
their partial fulfilment, even in his own time, ' that
the rest will have their completion in the time to
come ; ' 2 or when, commenting on Daniel's interpre-
tation of Nebuchadnezzar's dream, 3 he evades giving
an interpretation of the fate of the fourth kingdom,
which he evidently identifies with Rome, on the
ground that he had undertaken to describe the past
and the present but not the future, for the under-
standing of whose ' uncertainties,' ' whether they will
happen or not,' he refers the curious to the Book of
Daniel itself, which they would find among the sacred
writings. 4 Evidently, then, there was in the view of
Josephus, as well as of his contemporaries, a pro-
phetic future for Israel after the destruction of Jeru-
salem, and the stone cut out without hands predicted
to destroy the iron empire of Eome, of which he
refused to give the interpretation, must have been
1 In Antiq. xviii. 3. 3. 2 Ant. iv. 6. 5.
3 Dan. ii. * Ant. x. 10. 4.
LECT. rc. THE LAW .AM) THE PKOPHETS. SI
the Messianic kingdom. 1 Thus, there was universal
Messianic expectancy, and that expectancy was
traced to Old Testament prophecy. And, recalling
our previous arguments as to the extreme unlikeli-
ness of such a hope springing up in the period be-
tween Ezra and Christ, we might content ourselves
with challenging those who deny its Old Testament
origin to point out the period and the circumstances
of its beginning and development.
Still, it is at least conceivable, whatever the pre-
sumption to the contrary, that the whole Jewish
nation may have been mistaken in their Messianic in-
terpretation of the Old Testament. Yet we have here
something beyond an unbroken consensus of Messianic
interpretation. If the present historical arrangement
of the Old Testament Canon may be trusted not,
indeed, in reference to the precise date and author-
ship of each book (which are here not in question),
but as regards the general chronological succession
of the Law and the Prophetic writings it seems almost
impossible to deny that the Old Testament in its dif-
ferent parts is organically connected ; and that, as
previously stated, alike the connecting, the impelling,
and the final idea of it is that of a universal kingdom
of God upon earth ; and that this idea unfolds together
1 For a full discussion of the Messianic allusions in the -writings of
Josephus, I take leave to refer to my article on ' Josephus ' in Smith and
Wace's Dictionary of Christian Biography, vol. iii. p. 458.
32 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. KEOT. it.
with the development of religious knowledge and life
in Israel.
The distinction of terms just made is of such
importance in the argument as to warrant a seeming
digression. Man's life and understanding develop ;
God's purpose unfolds. The term ' purpose ' is indeed
anthropomorphic, and in its strict meaning could
not be applied to God, 1 since ' purpose ' not only
implies a reference to the future, but thinking
of the future with the view of acting upon it in
a certain definite manner. On the other hand,
strictly speaking, we cannot associate (either meta-
physically or theologically) the idea of ' future ' with
the Divine Being, nor yet such planning as implies
uncertainty about the future and adaptation to its
eventualities. If, therefore, we use the term, it is for
convenience' sake, and with the reservations just
made. What we know is, that, so far as regards
1 In the popular use of the term ' purpose/ it is only less objectionable
than the words ' plan ' and ' scheme ' which are so often applied by
theologians to the Divine Being. In our A. V. the word ' purpose ' occurs
in reference to God both in the Old and the New Testament. In the former
it occurs only in Isaiah and Jeremiah (Num. xiv. 34, margin, is a wrong
rendering). The equivalents for it in Isaiah are ^y to counsel, or take
counsel, and -^i to form in this aspect : to form ideally, to predestine,
of which usus Is. xxii. 11, xxxvii. 26, xliii. 7, xlvi. 11, are instances. In
Jeremiah the word used is 1SJT! to think, with the solitary exception of
Jer iv. 28, where it is DOT which has more the meaning of meditating.
In the New Testament it only occurs in the Pauline writings, where it
uniformly stands for rrpodea-is (or its verb) in the sense of placing before
one's self. It seems to me best explained by the expression els OVTO TOVTO
in Rom. ix. 17. But neither in the Old nor the New Testament does
it mean what we call ' purpose.'
ECT. it, THE
*:-
God, all is from the first before Him ; and that, in
history, it opens up unfolds to man's understand-
ing, in the course of his development. This may be
illustrated from the first intimation of the great Old
Testament hope, the so-called Prot-Evangelion, in
Genesis iii. 14, 15. The substantial accuracy of our
translation, 'He shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt
bruise his heel,' stands,! think, firm on critical grounds.
The rendering advocated by Professor Kuenen, 1
' This shall lie in wait for thy head, and thou shalt
lie in wait for his heel,' would, irrespective of linguistic
considerations, yield such feebleness of meaning as
almost to transform the pathos of God's final judg-
ment upon sin into bathos. It does not seem worthy
of record in what professes to be a Eevelation, nor yet
accordant with the solemnity of a Divine punitive
sentence, to decree and declare that in the physical
contest between man and the serpent the former is
to aim at the head of the serpent, while the latter
would, in its stealthy approach, aim at his heel. But
if the words mean, as the Church has always under-
stood thein, that there must ever be a great con-
flict between Humanity and the principle of evil, as
represented by the Serpent, and that in it Humanity
will be ultimately victorious, in and through its Ee-
presentative : crush the head of the Serpent, although
in this not without damage, hurt, and the poison of
1 Prophets and Prophecy in Israel, p. 376.
34 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. MOT. n
death -all is changed. In that case the sentence., is
full of meaning. It sets forth a principle ; it ennobles
our human nature by representing it as moral ; it
bears a promise ; it contains a prophecy ; it introduces
the Golden Age. It is the noblest saying that could
be given to Humanity, or to individual men, at the
birth of their history. In it the Bible sets forth at its
very opening these three great ethical principles, on
which rests the whole Biblical teaching concerning the
Messiah and His Kingdom : that man is capable of
salvation ; that all evil springs from sin, with which
mortal combat must be waged ; and that there will be
a final victory over sin through the Eepresentative of
Humanity. And this first promise does not afterwards
develop ; it contains initially all that is to be unfolded
in the course of the fullest development, so that we
might exclaim, with an ancient writer : ' Here begins
the book of the wars of the Lord ; ' or with Luther :
' Here rises the Sun of Consolation.'
This gradual unrolling in the sight of men, as they
were able to read it, of what from the first had been
written on the prophetic scroll accounts for the pecu-
liar form in which the future is so often presented in
prophecy. It explains how so many of the predictions
concerning the kingdom of God are presented under
a particularistic and national aspect. It was necessary
alike as regarded the people and the prophets ; and
it belonged to the Old Testament standpoint, quite as
LECT.II. THE FUTUKE AND THE PRESENT. B5
much, as its sacrifices, rites, institutions, and ceremonial
laws. We believe they had a deeper and an eternal
meaning which at that time and to that people could
only be set forth in such manner. Similarly, the pre-
dictive descriptions of the kingdom and the king came
to Israel in that nationalistic form in which alone they
could have been intelligibly presented. Zion, Israel
Moab, or else the then present enemies of the people
of God, and their conquest, had to them a meaning
which our later, Christian, ideas could have never
possessed, and which, indeed, it would have been im-
possible to convey otherwise than in such form. And
this also .must be kept in view, that all these pro-
phecies did historically start from Israel, and that
those nations did at that time actually represent the
enemies of the kingdom of God. Nor is it meant that
all such predictions applied to the kingdom of God.
Many of them were what is called temporal : that is,
they applied only to those times and to the circum-
stances and nations there mentioned. But, just as
the type is always based on the symbol the appli-
cation to the future on the meaning in the present
so are the prophecies of the kingdom presented in:
the forms of, and with application to, the then present
And in evidence that this view is not arbitrary, we
point to the circumstance that so often these pro-
mises, couched in the particularistic form, alternate
with, or merge into others where the horizon is tern-
D2
36 , PROPHECY AND HISTORY. ractt. li.
porarily enlarged and the application is universalistic.
This evidences that the world-wide idea of the
kingdom was present to the mind of Israel as matter
of faith and hope, even though it would ordinarily be
clothed in the forms of the time.
Prom this point of view we perceive the higher
need of some facts which recent criticism has esta-
blished, although a certain school has derived from
them inferences adverse to the prophetic character
of the Old Testament. First, we perceive that
generally, though not always, 1 the fulfilment must
not be expected to correspond literally with the
prophecy. This was the idea of prophecy enter-
tained by the old supra-naturalistic school, and was
strictly connected with its mechanical views of in-
spiration generally. Were it not for our sincere
respect for the earnest though ill-directed faith
which 'prompted these notions, we would seriously
complain of the misrepresentation of Biblical truth
which was their consequence, affording an easy vic-
tory to its opponents. But we object, with good
reason, that a certain school of critics argues as if
the view referred to were the only one possible, and
that it directs all its arguments to disprove what we
do not, and, in the nature of it, could not hold. It
1 The chief exceptions are when not a general sketch of, but a special
feature in the great prophetic future is set before us (such as Mic. v. 1,
in the A. V. v. 2, or certain parts of Ps. xxii.) In such cases we would
naturally expect absolute literality.
tfcci. a. P&OPHECY NOT PREDICTED BISTORT. 37
is not controversially merely in answer to our oppo-
nents but positively, as the outcome of the views
previously explained, that we would formulate these
principles in regard to *the fulfilment of Messianic
prophecy -, 1 that prophecy can only be properly under-
*
stood from the standpoint of fulfilment ; that prophecy
always starts from historical data in the then present ;
and that the fulfilment in each case not only covers
but is wider than the mere letter of the prophecy
wider than either the hearers, or perhaps the speaker
of it, had perceived. All this in a preliminary way
to be further explained in the sequel.
Secondly. This view of ' fulfilment ' leads up to
another point, on which we must enter more fully.
Here also our opponents have rightly apprehended
the facts, while they have laid upon us wrongful
inferences from them. Eor these three things follow
from the premisses previously stated : that prophecy
is not predicted history which, indeed, would be a
quite unworthy view of it ; that prophecy had always
a present meaning and present lessons to those who
heard it ; and that, as this meaning unfolded in the
course of history, it conveyed to each succeeding
generation something new, bringing to each fresh
present lessons. Nay, even in its final fulfilment each
prophecy has lessons to them who have witnessed its
1 Subject, of course, to the exception mentioned in the previous
note. '
38 PROPHECY A3SID S2STO&Y. LECT. n.
accomplislinient. In short, prophecy cannot be com-
pressed within the four corners of a fact : it is not
merely tidings about the future. It is not dead,
but instinct with undying life, and that life is divine.
There is a moral aspect in prophecy to all genera-
tions. Under one aspect of it, it prepares for the
future, and this is the predictive element of it.
Under its other aspect it teaches lessons of the pre-
sent to each generation ; and this is its moral aspect.
It is therefore not discordant with our belief in
prophecy, but the reverse, when our attention is
called to the fact that, as presented in Scripture,
the Prophets were not merely perhaps not even
primarily foretellers of future events, but that their
activity also extended to the then present : that they
'were reprovers, reformers, instructors. Certainly:
for they were God's messengers. But from this it
does not follow that the futuristic element had no
place in their calling. There is no inconsistency
between the two. On the contrary, it was the
underlying view of the future which gave meaning
and emphasis to their admonitions about the present.
I am quite aware that I must be prepared to furnish
a formula which will equally cover, and give unity
to, these two parts of their activity. My answer is
that, when the prophet foretells, he presents the
future in the light of the present ; and, when he
admonishes or reproves, he presents the present in
I.ECT..II. PROPHETIC TEACHING. &9
the light of that future wMcli he sees to be surely
coming. Thus he is always, and in all aspects of it,
the messenger of God to every generation.
It will now be perceived what was meant by the
statement that the kingdom of God was the connect-
ing, pervading, and impelling idea of the Old Testa-
ment. On the supposition of the trustworthiness
of the arrangement of the Old Testament into the
Law and the Prophets, Divines of all schools have
traced the unfolding both extensively and inten-
sively of this idea in the progressive development
of the history of Israel through its three stages : the
patriarchal, the Mosaic, and the prophetic. 1 And so
the history and institutions of Israel would lead up
to the doctrinal teaching of the New Testament. It
might, indeed, be objected, that in our view of the
arrangement of the Old Testament as Law and
Prophets there was not progression but retrogression,
since the prophetic writings seem to set forth more
simple and primitive notions as regards sacrifices
and ritual ordinances than those which underlie the
directions and arrangements of the ' Priest-Codex/
And it has been argued that this also proves that
the right order would be : the Prophets and the
Law, not the reverse, and that the Priest-Codex itself
1 So it may he said, without enumerating them by all writers. 'But,
as instances, Oehler (Theologie d. A. Test.) may be mentioned as an in-
stance on the one side, and Anger (Vorles. u. d, Gesch. d. Mess. Idee), on
the other side.
40 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. IECT. ir.
must be of late date. But these are ill-grounded
inferences. Seeming retrogression may be real pro-
gression, because correction, where principles had
been misunderstood, misapplied, or lost from view.
If two or three thousand years after this, and in the
absence of historical details of the change, it should
be argued that, instead of Medievalism and the
Eeformation, the historical succession should be the
Eeformation and Medievalism, because, as regarded
the priesthood, the centralisation of worship, ritual
ordinances, and the like, the Eeformation marked
the more simple and primitive, and must therefore
have preceded Medievalism, the inference would
be both fallacious and false. May we not say the
same in regard to this argument for the inversion of
the order, Law and Prophets ?
Let us try to mark the unfolding of the great
idea which the Bible places in its forefront, and
which, as we have stated, infolds all the religious
truth that has come to man in the course of his
development. Closely considered, the primeval pro-
mise already set before man the outlook on the
Kingdom of God in its ethical character. And that
kingdom was not placed on a particularistic or Judaic,
but on a universalistic basis. From this point of
view we can observe where the one spring divided,
and follow the parting streams of Jewish and heathen
development as they issued from the one source. A
IECI. ir.
THE HEATHEN DEVELOPMENT. 4l
new meaning here attaches, not only to the fact and
the response of conscience to the demands of right,
but also to the (however imperfect or even mis-
directed) 'striving after the right in the heathen
world. We can now understand the appeal to the
evidential force of God's works in nature, and much
more to that for God in the conscience, as made, not
only in the well-known passage of St. Paul's Epistle^
to the Eomans (ii. 14, 15), but also in the Old Testa-
ment, as in the sublime appeal to the heathen in
/
Is. xl. 21-26, in regard to the works of creation, and
in that derived from conscience in Ps. xciv. 9, 10 :
' He that planted the ear, shall He not hear ?
He that formed the eye, shall He not see? He
that chastens the nations (viz. inwardly, through
their consciences), shall He not punish He that
teacheth man knowledge ? ' The creator of the
human eye and ear must be the living God, Who
sees and hears. He Who implanted reason and
conscience in man is thereby evidenced as the,,
Rewarder of good and evil, and shall He not eventu-
ally so manifest Himself?
It is thus that the Old Testament, starting with a
universalistic object, can and does make its appeal to
heathendom, both concerning God and for God. And
what was the response made both to the first and to
the second of these appeals ? Only this : In its search
after God, the ancient world reached, indeed, beyond
42 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. laser, ir.
the gods many, and came very near, almost touched,
the idea of Unity. But this Supreme Unity, to which
ultimately men and gods were subject, was not a Per-
sonality, not the Living and True God, our reconciled
Father but Eate, blind, impersonal, immovable ; and
in this struggle between Eate and Virtue lay the mys-
tery, and the misery, and the ultimate self-despair of
heathenism. Or again, as regarded the second appeal
of the Old Testament to heathendom that for God
in the conscience, we recall the despairing expressions
of a Tacitus, 1 and the idea of a Cicero, 2 that if ever
the ideal of goodness and virtue, for which Humanity
had longed, and hitherto with such bitter disappoint-
ment, were to appear on earth, all men would fall down
before it in universal homage. We recall it to mark
the sad contrast of history. Just as the Ideal of Old
Testament expectation, for which universal Judaism
in its highest aspirations had longed, came to His
own, but only to be rejected of them, so did the
ideal of all goodness and virtue, the One universally-
admitted perfect Man for whom heathenism in its
highest aspirations had yearned receive, not uni-
versal homage, but universal rejection, when Jesus
was nailed to the cross.
In truth, the Jewish and Gentile developments are
1 Annal. iii. 18, iv. 1, xvi. 16. ; JEKst.ilL 72.
2 Dejinibus Ion. V. 24, 69. Cbmp. Bellinger's Heidenth. u. Judenth.
p. 732, and, rrenerally, the admirable section pp. 728-734.
LBCT. ir. THE JEWISH DEVELOPMENT. 4B
not so far apart as we sometimes imagine. They were
at one in their beginning, and they are at one in their
ending. And the course of their development also
was closely parallel, although in heathenism the issue
appeared in the negative ; in Judaism, on the other
hand, in a positive form. But the unconscious cry of
both was after the life, the Light, the real, the true :
after moral deliverance and the Kingdom of God.
Turning from the course of heathen to that of
Jewish development, we recall the apt observation,
that the Biblical conception of Eevelation really looks
back upon the account of the Creation, when our
world was called into being by the Word, and its life
imparted by the Spirit of God. This internal connec-
tion between the Word or Eevelation and Creation
also implies that in Eevelation we shall find the same
general order which we observe in the physical
world especially the law of historical progress that
is, as we now understand it, progression in history.
The one underlying idea of Eevelation is, as we have
seen, the great ethical prospect in that primeval pro-
mise which the Bible places at its forefront the out-
look on a universal Kingdom of God. This primeval
promise and principle alike forms the beginning and
is the goal ; it is the heading and the summary of
Eevelation. And it was this foundation-truth which
unfolded throughout the course of Israel's develop-
ment in their history, rites, and institutions, as well
44 . PROPHECY AND HISTORY. LECI. il,
as in tlie more direct communications through the
Prophets. We can only indicate this here in briefest
outline.
The ideal object of Israel's calling, and hence of
their history and institutions, seems expressed in the
first promise to their father Abraham : ' In thee and
in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be
blessed.' 1 This promise is so fundamental as to be
thrice repeated to Abraham 2 ; it is renewed to Isaac 3 ;
and reiterated to Jacob. 4 If this promise had any real
Divine meaning, it must have been intended to mark,
as it were, the planting-ground for the Kingdom of
God, whence in the fulness of time and of prepara-
tion it would be transplanted into the heathen world ;
in other words, the blessings of that kingdom were
to be imparted through Israel to the world at large.
There is nothing narrow or particularistic, but a
grand universalism, even about this earliest presenta-
tion of the promise in a concrete form. And that
such was the object and mission of Israel, is clearly
indicated on the eve of the Sinaitic legislation : ' Ye
shall be My property from among all nations, for all
1 The rendering of lliia passage seems sufficiently established. See
Note at the end of this Lecture.
2 Gen. xii. 3 ; xviii. 18 ; xxii. 18. This relation of Abraham to the
world at large seems, as Dr. Bacher rightly infers, implied in the Tal-
mudic statement (Baba S, p. 91 a), that at the death of Abraham all
the great ones of the world stood as mourners, and exclaimed : ' Woe to
the world which has lost its guide ; woe to the ship which has lost its
helmsman ' (Bacher, Die Agada d. Bab. Amorceer, p. 13).
3 Gen. xxvi. 4, - . 4 Gen. xxviii, 14,
LECT. ii. IDEAL DESTINY OF ISRAEL. 45
the earth is mine ; ye shall be unto Me a kingdom of
priests and a holy nation.' l As Israel was ideally, so v
all nations were through their ministry to become
really the possession of God : a kingdom of priests, a
holy people ; for all the earth, as well as Israel, was
God's. And the realisation of this would be the
kingdom of God on earth.
All the institutions of Israel were in strict ac-
cordance with this ideal destiny. Alike the laws, the
worship, the institutions, and the mission of Israel
were intended to express these two things : acknow-
ledgment of God and dependence upon God. Thus
viewed, the whole might be summed up in this one
term, which runs through the whole Old Testament :
' The Servant of Jehovah.' The patriarchs were the
Servants of the Lord ; Israel was the Servant of the
Lord ; and their threefold representative institutions
expressed the same idea. The Priest was to be wholly
the Servant of the Lord. Hence the smallest trans-
gression of the ordinances of his calling involved his
destruction or removal. The King was not to bear
rule in the manner of heathen princes, but to be the
Servant of the Lord, in strictest subordination to
Jehovah. Hence Saul, despite his nobler qualities, was
really the Antichrist ; and David, despite his grievous
faults, the typical Christ of Israel's royalty, because of
his constant acknowledgment of God's kingship. And
1 Ex, six. 5.
46 PEOPHEOY AND HISTORY. IOSCT. n.
the Prophet was simply the Servant of the Lord, telling
nought but God's Word, in such strict adherence to
the letter of his commission, that its slightest breach
brought immediate punishment. And the Messiah,
as summing up in Himself ideal Israel its history,
institutions, mission, and promises was to be the
Servant of the Lord. Hence the prophecies which
most clearly portray Him those of Isaiah might be
headed by this title: The Book of the Servant of
Jehovah ; the idea rising, through people, prophet,
king, even through a foreign instrumental doer of His
behest, up to Him as the Servant of the Lord, the
ideal Sufferer by and for the unrighteousness of man,
the ideal Sacrifice and Priest for his sins, the ideal
Teacher in his ignorance, Comforter in his sorrow,
Eestorer in his decay, and Dispenser of all blessing to
the world at large the Spirit-anointed One, out of
Whose fulness all were to receive, and Who would
fulfil all that Israel had meant and prepared. Or, going
backwards, He was to be the Son of Man, the Second
Adam, whose victory would restore what sin had
lost : the true Son of God, God manifest in the flesh.
This, we believe, the Old Testament meant, and Jesus
of Nazareth came to fulfil.
In saying this, I am at least not misrepresenting
what the Gospels indicate as the meaning of the Old
Testament, and as that which stood out before the
Christ as the object of His Mission. I cannot express it
LEGT. ii. CHRIST AND THE OLD TESTAMENT. 47
better than in the language of one who belonged to a
school of critics from which I widely differ, but whose
deep insight and spiritual appreciativeness contrast
markedly with the levity of others of the same direc-
tion. 'The call of Jesus,' he writes, 1 'points back,
first to John, and then, much further, into the Old
Testament. The conception of the Kingdom of God,
which to our modern consciousness seems somewhat
obscure ... is one of the fundamental ideas of
the Old Testament. It was the pride of Israel, riot
merely because Israel believed in the privileges it
would confer on themselves, but because alone of
all nations Israel was capable of believing in the
possibility of a covenant between heaven and earth,
between God and man, in a welding of Divine pur-
poses with the counsels of earth, and in the fact that,
even within the modest boundaries of a small nation,
the rule of earthly affairs was not unworthy of God.
To be sure, this also constituted Israel's sorrow and
source of suffering in the course of history ; the limit-
ation not only of its free political and purely human,
but even of its religious development ; the appointed
bitter criticism of a Keality which ever fell short and
ever contradicted the Ideal. But in this very sorrow
and never-ceasing criticism of earthly lamentation and
limitation, Israel became the guide and leader in that
infinite striving which, by believing in and seeking
1 Keim, Jem von Nazara, ii. pp. 35, 36.
48 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. LBCT. n.
after the coming Kingdom of God, and by the final
real Advent of the Messiah upon earth, would and
did join Idea and Keality the life of God and that
of man, heaven and earth. The one pervading and
impelling idea of the Old Testament is the royal reign
of God on earth. . . . Almost a thousand years before
Christ rises the longing cry after the future King-
dom of God a kingdom which is to conquer and to
win all nations, and to plant in Israel righteousness,
knowledge, peace, and blessing that Kingdom of God
in which God, or his Vicegerent, the Messiah, is to
be King over the whole earth, and all generations are
to come up and worship the Lord of Hosts.'
On this only too brief extract I might have been
content to rest the case. But I must not forget, even
in this preliminary statement, that, since the eloquent
words just quoted were written, the study of the Old
Testament has entered into an entirely new phase at
any rate so far as its influence on English theological
thinking is concerned. The critical conclusions ar-
rived, or at least aimed at, are of the most wide-
reaching character. As stated in the previous Lecture,
they have this advantage, that they promise to explain
every difficulty though to our mind this is anything
but evidence of their truth ; that they are propounded
by men of great critical learning, and presented by
them as the undoubted outcome of the best critical
research ; and that they are supported by arguments
LEOT. ii. UNCERTAINTIES OF NEGATIVE CRITICISM. 49
which, to those unacquainted with the details of
the controversy, must appear most specious. While
reserving for another occasion 1 such answer as
may be necessary for the general argument of these
Lectures, I must be allowed, even at this stage, to
express some general objections. It is not said to
create a prejudice, but as a matter of fact, that
critics even of the same school are still in hopeless
contradiction, not as to minor details, but on such
primary questions as the authorship of different
parts of the Pentateuch, or their respective dates,
on both of which divergent conclusions are advanced
and with equal certitude. From which, I think,
we may at least infer that no sure ground has yet
been reached in regard to them. Further, some of
the arguments are, almost admittedly, unsatisfactory,
such as that which would infer the age or com-
position of certain parts of the Pentateuch from
linguistic peculiarities. And the conclusion seems,
at least to me, quite clear that the whole question
will have to be decided mainly on internal grounds.
Lastly, the arguments are not unfrequently mixed up
with such extraordinary speculations as not only to
weaken the force of the general reasoning, but to
make us distrustful of the whole direction. 2
Indeed, primdfade, some of the main conclusions
1 See Lectures VII. and VIII. and A.ppendix II.
a For some instances of this, see Lecture VHI.
E
50 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. user. n.
propounded by that school of critics seem to involve
the strongest improbabilities. Most of us are in
some measure cognisant how books are written. Let
us compare with this, for example, the account which
Wellhausen the representative of that school best
known among us gives of the origin of the Pen-
tateuch. 1 Truth to say, it is so complicated that
it would be impossible to compress it in one sentence,
and so involved as to make it difficult to present it
in a quite clearly intelligible manner. Suffice it that
the Pentateuch (or rather Hexateuch) is made up of
a number of books which themselves have under-
gone several ' redactions,' and been successively
incorporated into yet other books, with still other
' redactions.' Each of these is represented by a
special letter, indicative of its authorship or cha-
racteristics. Thus we have sources respectively
initialed, E, E 2 , J, J 2 , D, JE 2 , PC, and Q, besides the
final redaction of them all. Some of these have not
only undergone revisions, but P, for example, is c a
conglomerate, the work of a whole school ; ' while D
consists of a centrepiece that had undergone two
editions, with additions, respectively, before and after
it. As we try to realise the multiplicity of books not
consulted, used, or quoted, but incorporated in the
composition of the Pentateuch ; remember, that of
1 In his various writings, especially in the Geschichte Israel's, and
in the article ' Israel' in vol. xiii. of the present edition of the Eneyclop.
LECT. n. LITERARY DIFFICULTIES OF THE THEORY. 51
some of these books only small fragments are pre-
served, and even those in small pieces cunningly
distributed here and there ; and finally think of the
various additions they have received, and redactions
to which they have been subjected the mind be-
comes bewildered. No other book has ever been
composed in this manner. It may be as Wellhausen
says ; but in that case the Pentateuch is certainly,
from a literary point of view, a unique production.
We know that in the composition of a work many
sources may be used and various authorities quoted,
yet literary history would be searched in vain for
another patchwork of the kind in which half-a-dozen
or more books are cut up and pieced together in so
cunning a manner. Viewed as a purely literary
question, the story of the Pentateuch, as told by some
of these critics, is not only unparalleled, but trans-
parently improbable.
It need scarcely be said that this post-dating and
inversion of the Pentateuch has most important se-
quences. In the first place, it presents the ancient
religion of Israel as something quite different from
what we had been formerly led to regard it ; indeed,
as a form of nature-religion, barbarous, and kindred
to those of the nations around. And so the most fun-
damental questions, such as in regard to human sacri-
fices, the worship of Baal, and other points of the
B 2
52" PROPHECY AKD HISTORY. IECT. n.
kind, have to be discussed anew. 1 On the other hand,
if the previously received order has to be inverted
and we are henceforth to write, the Prophets and
the Law if the Pentateuch, viewed as Mosaic legis-
lation, is, to speak plainly, a deception, we cannot
wonder if the so-called Prophets are a delusion. I
do not misrepresent Kuenen when I state this as the
outcome of the book already referred to, that there
is no such thing as Prophetisni or Prophets in the
sense which the Church attaches to these terms ; that
what are called fulfilled prophecies are simply a mis-
take ; while unfulfilled prophecies are a delusion. But
not only was the future towards which the Prophets
looked a delusion, 2 but their activity in the then
present did not advance the welfare of the people,
and Prophetism was alike ignorant of State policy
and dangerous to the State. These self-appointed
enthusiasts must, according to the new theory, be
placed far below the Eoman tribunes of the people. 3
Their only contribution was an ethical monotheism,
although, as Professor Kuenen adds, 'Even without
their aid Polytheism would, perhaps, have made way
for the recognition and the worship of one only God.'
And with strange historical boldness, the commence-
ment of such a reformation is discerned in the
1 On these points see the recent very interesting tractate by Konig,
Die Hauptprobleme d. altisr, JReligionsgesch.
2 Kuenen, u. s., p. 568. 3 Kuenen, u. s.. pp. 587, 588,
ri. dEITIOlL KiTFICtfLTJES OF THE THEOKY. 53
Eoman Empire at the beginning of the Christian era,
although Kuenen declares it doubtful whether the
monotheism of the people, not of the philosophers,
would have been what he calls ' ethical.' 1
But in cutting away all ground in Old Testament
prophecy for an expectation of the kingdom, Pro-
fessor Kuenen's theory surely condemns itself. For,
as a matter of fact, this expectancy did exist, not
only in the time of Jesus, but certainly two centuries
before. And even Kuenen hesitates to accept the
view of Schultz, that many of the Messianic interpre-
tations originated among ' the Jews among whom
the Prophet of Nazareth laboured.' But if so, what
explanation of them can be offered ? Only this : ' In
the centuries which preceded the establishment of
Christianity a new conception of the words of the Pro-
phets and Psalmists must have been formed, which,
in distinction from the actual meaning of these men,
could be called the second sense of Scripture.' 2 Pro-
bably few persons would call such perversion of the
real meaning its second sense. But it is surely, a
strange use of language when Professor Kuenen
calls this the ' allegorical exegesis,' and adds that
' allegorical exegesis is the inseparable companion of
the process of the clarification of religious views ' 3
Most students would reverse this epigrammatic
1 Kuenen, u. s. pp. 589, 590.
2 The words are those of Schultz, but adopted by Kuenen, u. s.,
p. 540. 3 U, s., p. 543.
54 PEOPHECY AND HISTOEY. EECT. fl.
generalisation, and characterise such ' allegorical
exegesis ' as contributing rather to the process of
darkening than that of ' clarifying ' religious views.
But the point to which I wish at present to call
special attention is, that, when challenged to show
how these Messianic interpretations had originated,
Professor Kuenen has no better answer to offer than
the assertion, that a new conception must have been
formed in the centuries which preceded Christianity.
It is perhaps well that all the sequences of so
bold and thoroughgoing a theory should clearly
appear. And it will afford yet other evidence of the
internal and inseparable connection between the Old
and New Testament. Nor has Professor Kuenen
denied that such did exist, at least, in the mind of
Christ and His Apostles. But he declares that in this
they had wholly misunderstood and misinterpreted
the real and primary meaning of the Old Testament.
To quote his own words : ' If they [Jesus Christ and
the Apostles] had continued still to occupy altogether
th,e standpoint of the old prophets and poets, Jesus
of Nazareth would not have been accepted as the
Messiah.' Then must the Synagogue have been right
in rejecting the claims of Jesus, and in crucifying
Him as a Deceiver of the people !
Surely, this is a startling conclusion. And yet,
we repeat, it is well that the issue should be so nar-
rowed, and the real alternative stand out in plain
LECT. II.
NOTE ON GEN. XH. 3. 5
language. With belief in the Christ as presented in
the New Testament, the prophetic character of the
Old Testament is also established; with the rejection
of prophecy in the Old Testament the claims of Christ,
as set forth in the New Testament, fall to the ground.
Which of these shall it be ? Let history decide.
NOTE ON GEN. xii. 3.
Professor Kuenen has maintained, in the most unhesitating
manner, that the usual rendering of this verse is incorrect, and that
it should read, ' The families of the earth shall bless themselves
with Abraham,' i.e. ' Shall wish for themselves, or for one another,
the blessing which Jahveh bestowed upon him.' He grounds this
interpretation on the fact that, in three out of the five passages in
which the word occurs, 1 the verb * blessing ' is in the Niphal,
while in two of the passages 2 it is in the Hithpael. He holds
that, if it meant 'be blessed,' the Pual form ought to have been
used. Even if it were so, Kuenen's final inferences would be un-
warrantable, as appears from the circumstance that so orthodox a
commentator as Delitzsch holds the same view as to the meaning
of the verb, and yet firmly retains the Messianic interpretation,
which indeed rests, not upon the verb, but upon the words ' in
thee and in thy seed.' Let me try to put this in a clearer light.
First. Despite the authority of Kuenen, Delitzsch, and others, I
must still hold the grammatical admissibility of the rendering
' shall be blessed.' This has been ably vindicated by Professor
Stanley Leathes in his "Warburton Lectures. 3 It is the rendering
of the LXX, substantially that of the Targum Onkelos ("]^"n, on
thy account), and the Jerusalem Targum ("jn'DTl, by thy merit),
1 Gen. xii. 2, 3 ; xviii. 18 ; xxviii. 13, 15.
2 Gen. xxii. 16-28 ; xxvi. 3, 4. 3 Pp. 34, 35.
56 NOTE ON GEN. XH. 3. EECT. ir.
which certainly cannot be accused of any Christian leaning, as
well as that of Kimchi, as regards the Niphal form, and among
modern Jewish writers notably of Kalisch. These authorities may
at any Vate be taken as evidence of the admissibility of such a
rendering. Secondly. But the main difficulty of Kuenen's inter-
pretation lies in this, that he regards the expression ' to bless in '
as equivalent to ' bless with anyone,' in the signification ' to wish
for oneself or for others the blessing which the person in question
enjoys.' Now this view must be incorrect, if we are to judge of it
by the instances quoted by Kuenen. In Is. Ixv. 16, Jer. iv. 2, the
expression is ' blessing themselves in God,' where certainly it cannot
mean : to wish for oneself the blessing which the person in question
enjoys, but the blessing which proceeds from a person. In Deut.
xxix. 18 it cannot of course have the meaning for which Kuenen
contends. In Ps. lxxii.*17, even if we reject its Messianic appli-
cation, it cannot possibly mean that all nations ' shall wish for
themselves the blessing which Solomon enjoyed,' but rather that
of which Solomon was the medium of communication. All the
passages, therefore, quoted by Kuenen go against Mm. The ' usual
meaning of the phrase ' cannot be determined by Gen. xlviii. 20
(' in thee shall Israel bless '), where the expression is used almost
figuratively, as appears from the explanation which immediately
follows, ' Elohim place thee like Ephraim and like Manasseh ; '
not, as in our A.Y., ' make thee ' but ' set thee ; ' viz. in the
same favourable position. Generally, then, it will appear that
the rendering for which Kuenen contends is, as regards the crucial
word, ' in thee and in thy seed," inadmissible. Besides, I would
remark that, if the writer had meant to convey that the nations
should wish for themselves the blessing which Jehovah bestowed
on Abraham, he might have chosen a less ambiguous mode of
expression than this, 'shall bless themselves with Abraham.'
Lastly. It must be evident that, even if Kuenen were correct in
explaining ' they shall wish for themselves the blessing which God
bestowed on Abraham,' it would not by any means prove that this
blessing refers to outward things, such as either the possession of
NOTE t>N frm Xit'8,' 67
tt.
the land, or any similar good. It can scarcely be imagined that at
any later 'period of Israelitish history a writer would have put into
the mouth of the nations as their highest wish that of sharing
the outward fortunes of Israel, unless, indeed, he looked forward
to a prophetic future. But in that case the interpretation would
be that of a prophetic blessing, or in principle come back upon
the view for which we have contended. On the linguistic, as well
as the general critical aspect of the question, compare also the
interesting remarks of Hoflmann, Schrift-Bew. ii. 1, pp. 103,
104, fec.
tKOPHECY AND HISTOEY. HOT. nr.
LECTUEE HI.
THE FAITH AND RITES OF THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH ARE CON-
FIRMED BY INDUBITABLE CHRISTIAN, AND BY IMPORTANT
NON-CHRISTIAN EVIDENCE.
Whom do men say that I the Son of Man am ? And they said : Some say
that Thou art John the Baptist ; some Elijah, and others Jeremiah, or
one of the prophets. He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am ?
And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of
the living God. ST. MATT. xvi. 13-16.
IT cannot be regarded as a real digression from
the line of our argument if, before proceeding, we
guard ourselves against a preliminary objection, since,
if it were established, our whole reasoning would be
disposed of. Hitherto we have contended that the
New Testament in its origin looks back upon the
Old ; that the one all-pervading idea of the Old
Testament is, that of the Kingdom of God through
the Messiah ; and that the Apostles and primitive
disciples saw the realisation of it in the mission, the
history, and the teaching of Jesus of Nazareth. But
what if this point were called in question, and
there be no real ground for believing that the views
which we impute to them were held by the primitive
Christians ? And the inquiry into the primitive belief
LECT. in. PRIMITIVE BELIEF OF THE CHURCH. 59
of the Church, gains in importance as we remember
that the primitive records in the Gospels have been
assailed on many sides : their date and authorship
have been disputed ; they have been described as
partly spurious, partly interpolated ; as exaggerated,
or else coloured by prevailing superstitions ; and as
designed to foist later ideas upon primitive teaching,
and to bring professedly apostolic authority to bear
on existing controversies. Besides, what evidence
is there outside the four Gospels (or some allusions
in the Epistles) all of them being in the nature of
interested witnesses that these supposed facts really
formed the data on which primitive Christian belief
rested? It is evident that these questions concern
the very existence of the citadel to which we have
been seeking to trace the avenues.
Some of the points just mentioned lie, indeed,
outside our present inquiry. Our argument only
requires us to make sure of the primitive belief of
.the Church in the facts recorded in the Gospels, and
on which the conviction was grounded that Jesus of
Nazareth was the Messiah of Old Testament pro-
phecy. It does not require us to establish that this
belief was well founded, nor yet that the facts them-
selves on which it rested were absolutely and lite-
rally true. We have at present to deal with the
authenticity of the Gospel-records only as expressive
of the primitive faith, not with the grounds on which.
60 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. LBCT. in.
that faith rested. The latter inquiry is, indeed, of
the deepest importance, nor would we shrink from
making it were this the right place for it. 1 But our
present business is only to show that the primitive
disciples believed certain facts (whether true or false),
on the ground of which they regarded Jesus as the
Messiah. Nor is it even necessary for our argument
to prove that all that is recorded in the four Gospels
represents the primitive tradition and belief of the
Church. This also is a most important question, but
it forms not the subject of our present inquiry. For
our purpose it is enough if sufficient is established
on which to ground the conviction that Jesus was the
Messiah : sufficient that looked back into the past
of Old Testament prophecy, and forward into the
future of New Testament history.
But even in this narrowed aspect of the question
an affirmative answer will advance us a long way. It
will establish the historic continuity of the New with
the Old Testament ; it will make quite clear what
the primitive Christians did certainly believe about
the Christ, why they regarded Jesus as the Messiah,
and how far their primary belief led them. And
more than this, and beyond the scope of our present
argument, it will afford presumptive evidence of the
reality of the facts on which primitive belief rested.
1 Perhaps I may be allowed to say that this is a task which I have
in view, in another Tbook.
IECT. ni. STATEMENT OF THE ARGUMENT. 61
For, if it were proved by the general consensus of
primitive tradition that certain facts concerning Jesus
were universally held to have occurred, and that
certain doctrines were founded on them as inferences
from these facts, and certain rites introduced as
memorials of them or, conversely, if certain doc-
trines or rites can be historically established as
primitive which look back upon certain Gospel facts
as their necessary basis then we have such pre-
sumptive evidence in their favour that it will be
requisite for negative criticism not only historically
to prove their incorrectness, but also historically to
account for this general consensus of belief regarding
them in the primitive Church, and for the origin of
the doctrines and rites which were their outcome.
And here, as already stated, we are not limited
to the mere historical record of these facts in the
Gospels or Epistles. We have other, and quite as
strong, evidence that they formed part of the primi-
tive faith of the Church in the doctrines and rites
which demonstrably looked back upon them. If we
can prove from undoubted and even non-Christian
testimony that certain doctrines were held and certain
rites practised, which necessarily refer to certain
facts recorded in the Gospel-history, we have pro
tanto confirmation of the reception of these facts
that is, that they formed part of the primitive belief
of the Church. We have thus two lines of evidence :
62 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. LECT. m.
that from the unquestioned record of primitive tra-
dition in the Christian writings, and that from the
unquestionable evidence of the existence of certain
doctrines and practices in the primitive Church. The
one will rest on Christian, the other on non-Christian
documents ; and as regards the latter, it may be found
sometimes to stretch beyond the evidence of doctrines
and rites to that of some of the facts recorded in the
Gospels.
If in the view of some we needlessly narrow the
evidence in favour of primitive doctrines and rites
by confining it to non-Christian (Jewish and heathen)
testimony, there is in the present argument good
ground for so doing. It is, indeed, not likely that
those possessing at once sufficient information on the
subject and calmness of judgment would regard the
picture of the primitive Church, or rather of the two
fundamentally dissimilar Churches, which M. Eenan
has painted in his ' Conferences d'Angleterre,' 1 as a
portraiture of the original state of matters ; still less,
that they would accept his views as to the 'post-
humous ' conciliation of what he calls the Church of
St. Peter with that of St. Paul the Church of Eome
1 See especially the second and third ' Conference,' and notably pp. 134,
etc. I may he allowed here to quote a sentence from a well-known Jewish
writer which seems to me apposite: 'It is certainly no exaggeration if
I say that from, one aspect I prefer the orthodox representation of the
origines of Christianity to that of Renan ' (Joel, Bl. in d. Relig.-Gesch.
ii. p. 9). He then proceeds to show the self-contradictory character of
some of Renan's views.
LECT. in. THE PRIMITIVE CStJRCH. 63
with that of Jerusalem and of their union, which
the ' Book of Acts ' is supposed, by a pious fraud, to
represent as accomplished from the first. The histo-
tical assumptions are here too evident, the facts on
the other side too numerous, and the explanatory
hypothesis is too ingenious, to allow ourselves to be
carried away by the brilliant diction and the epigram-
matic generalisations of the eloquent Frenchman. It
would require far more than this to lead us to attri-
bute to the simple-mindedness of the early Christians
such an act of haute politique in what to them was
matter of deepest spiritual conviction ; or to ascribe
to them deliberate fraud in that for which they were
ready to pour forth their life's blood. And the more
you accentuate as is the wont of that school the
supposed fundamental differences between Petrine
and Pauline teaching ; the more you insist on the
intensity with which each party clung to its principles,
the less likely does a 'reconciliation,' such as that
described, appear. Not a peaceful fusion that covered
the differences, but a life-and-death struggle, would be
the likely result with such combatants. But while
the line of defence is on all sides good, yet there is
such difference of views and such contention about
the apostolic, and, on many points, such unclearness
about many things in the post-apostolic, Church, that
we willingly forego in our present argument all
reference to either, so as to avoid what, after all would
64 i>ROPHECY AM) MlSTORY. Edi. in.
be a needless complication. We shall, therefore, not
go beyond the period of the Gospels ; and appeal for
the rest to non-Christian evidence, in proof that the
main facts, on "which the conviction rested that Jesus
was the Old Testament Messiah, formed part of the
primitive belief of the Church.
In other respects, also, it is equally interesting
and important to draw the line of distinction between
Evangelic and Apostolic times, and between Evangelic
and Apostolic literature the latter including 'the
Book of Acts.' The doctrine (StSa^iJ) which is the
outcome of the one we may designate as the faith and
rites of the primitive Christians ; that of the other, as
the dogmas and practices of the Apostolic Church.
In regard to the latter, we may say that the one
grand principle underlying all is that of Apostolicity.
I hasten to add that I use the term, not in the sense
which in recent theological discussions has been at-
tached to it, but in what is its real meaning Christ-
sentness. In this sense, apostolicity has a twofold ap-
plication : as apostolicity of office and apostolicity of
teaching. Whatever diversity of gifts or of adminis-
tration may have existed or been tolerated, above them
all was apostolicity of office, which St. Paul, as well
as St. Peter, St. John, and St. James, energetically vin-
dicated for themselves against all gainsayers. What-
ever was not apostolic or apostolically sanctioned was
to be repudiated. And by the side of this supremacy
iisbx. lit THE TWO PEEIODS. 65
of the apostolic office we have that of apostolic teach-
ing. Whatever differences in views or practices may
have been tolerated and there is evidence of the
most wide-hearted liberality in both respects yet,
what of doctrine or practice was apostolic must be
absolutely received, while the opposite was absolutely
banned. Evidently, we have already passed, or at
least are passing, out of the formative into the his-
toric period. The age of historic memorial has
already begun, when appeal is made to the teaching
and the practice of Apostles, apostolic men, and apo-
stolic Churches. Not so during the first or formative
period of the Church. Then the teaching was directly
that of Christ, and the rites and practices were simply
the outcome of that teaching. And this also is dis-
tinctive. Under the Old Testament, doctrine was in
great measure the outcome of rites ; under the New,
rites are the outcome of doctrine. The relation is in
accordance with the character of each : in the one
case, from without inwards ; in the other, from within
outwards. The application of these principles is wide-
reaching, and, as will appear in the sequel, closely
bears on our present argument.
To the Christian heart it must at all times be most
painful to follow in detail the criticism of the Gospels
as made by the more advanced negative school.
Quite irrespective of the valid answer which, we are
fully convinced, can, on scientific grounds, be given
ff
66 PROPHECY AND SiSTOiH?. was.
to their objections, and the good defence which can
be made of the positions taken up by the Church,
there are preliminary considerations which will, with
good reason, weigh with thoughtful persons more
heavily than merely logical arguments and ingenious
hypotheses. The school in question proceeds in its
criticism of the Gospels on the avowed principle, that
where they do not preserve the original tradition, they
interpolate or intentionally falsify for a definite pur-
pose that purpose bearing mainly on the supposed
two hostile tendencies in the Church of Judaic and
Gentile Christianity, the supposed object being to
advocate either the one or the other tendency, or
else to conciliate them. To adopt the expressive
term of German critics : where our present Gospels
deviate from the original traditions, they are mainly
Tendenz-Schriften 1 (tendency- writings). But, to my
thinking, it seems inconceivable, from the intellectual,
and still more from the moral point of view, that the
early Christians and, indeed, it must have been the
leading men among them should have deliberately
falsified facts and invented incidents, and that in con-
nection with the Personality of Jesus, Who to them
was the all in all. That the writers of our Gospels
should have so altered the original traditions and
documents (which, according to our opponents, they
elaborated into their works), seems, to say the least,
1 Comp. Witticlxen^ Leben, Jesu, p. 47.
. TRUSTWOBTffiNESS OF CANONICAL WEITEBS. 67
intellectually highly improbable, and morally abso-
lutely incredible. That they who so thought of the
Christ should, for ecclesiastical purposes, or to bring
about a * conciliation' which in itself seems psycho-
logically and historically an unlikely undertaking
have falsified and invented, constitutes the very climax
of improbabilities. They may have been misinformed ;
they may have been mistaken ; they may have viewed
things from the standpoint of their time ; they may
have exaggerated : all this is conceivable, though his-
torical proof would be required for it but to asso-
ciate with them 6 Tendency -Literature ' seems morally
impossible. 1
But our argument is not merely a priori. We have
quite a series of witnesses who give incidental confir-
mation to much in the Gospels. St. Paul, who became
a Christian some years after the Crucifixion, must
have been acquainted with the traditions and views
about Jesus current among those early believers
whom he had persecuted. And there is evidence
throughout his writings, that after his conversion he
had taken pains further to acquaint himself with the
1 The argument is in no way affected "by the undoubted existence of
religious interpolations in early -writings, and the introduction of spurious
ones, or other ' pious frauds.' For neither was this done hy Apostolic
men, nor yet did they set forth foundation-facts or truths which were
universally and unquestioningly received, nor yet were their authors pre-
pared to stake their lives on the veracity of their accounts. But the
main element is the moral that Spirit of Truth sent hy the Father into
the hearts of the Apostles to lead them into all truth.
68 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. LBOT. ffit.
historical grounds, that is, with the facts in Christ's
history, on which the belief of the Church rested.
Indeed this must have been a primary necessity to a
nature so logical as his, and to one who had to advo-
cate among Greeks and philosophers a doctrine so
inherently unlikely as the Divine Mission, the atoning
Death, and the Eesurrection of Christ. And his
teaching even limiting ourselves to those epistles
which the most , severe negative criticism admits as
genuine, 1 is in every point grounded upon the data of
the Gospels, and hence pro tanto a confirmation of
them. Besides, the bases of his doctrinal system also
rest on the teaching of Jesus, as we gather its spirit
from the reports in the Gospels. We remind our-
selves here of such teaching as concerning the value-
lessness of mere outward observances ; concerning the
Law as presented by the Leaders of Israel ; concern-
ing the opening of the Kingdom of God to the Gen-
tile world ; concerning the insufficiency and inefficacy
of outward distinctions and advantages ; concerning
the rule of the Spirit within the heart, and His trans-
formation of our nature ; concerning the need of
absolute self-surrender to God, like that of Christ ;
concerning the character and purpose of Christ's
Death ; His institution of the Last Supper ; His
1 According to Wittichen (u. s., p. 14) these are, Romans (with the
exception of the greater part of the two last chapters), Corinthians,
Galatians, 1 Thessalonians, parts of Colossians and of 2 Timothy, Phile-
mon, and Philippians.
laser, ra. PAULINE REFERENCES TO- THE GOSPELS. 69
Besurrection, and His coming again. AH this, and
more that could be mentioned, carries with it a
train of obvious sequences evidential of the historical
character of the Gospels.
But even this is not all. The reference of St.
Paul to the Twelve Apostles, 1 and to the t brethren
of the Lord,' are not the only direct references to
incidents in the Gospel narrative. Even on the
admission of negative critics, we have in the un-
doubted Pauline epistles direct verbal references to
passages in the Gospels. Thus, St. Matt. v. 39, &c.,
is the basis of Bom. xii. 17, 21 ; we are reminded of
St. Matt. xiii. in Gal. v. 9 ; of St. Matt. xxii. 40 in
Gal. v. 14 ; of St. Mark xi. 23 by 1 Cor. xiii. 2 ; of
St. Mark xiii. 26 by 1 Thess. iv. 17 ; of St. Luke vi.
27, &c., by 1 Cor. iv. 12, &c. ; comp. Bom. xii. 14 ;
and of St. Luke xii. 40 in 1 Thess. v. 2. 2 These
.verbal as well as real coincidences are of the most
important evidential bearing on the Gospel narratives.
And to these might, be added similar references in
the other epistles of St. Paul, which have not been
here adduced, because their authenticity has been
questioned by certain critics, our present object
being to present only such evidence as is undisputed.
1 1 Cor. xv. 6.
a I have taken (and re-arranged) these references from Wittichen
(u. s., p. 60), whom, in general, I have followed in his argument, and that
the more readily because he represents the very extreme of negative
criticism. I have thus sought to support my argument on grounds taken
from our most pronounced opponents, and based it on their admissions.
70 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. BSCT. in,
Suffice it to state that references to St. Matthew,
St. Mark, and St. Luke have been traced in the
Epistles to the Ephesians and to the Colossians. 1
Similar references to the Synoptic Gospels to
which we here confine ourselves occur in other
apostolic writings, notably in the Epistle of St. James
and the Book of Eevelation. In the former class we
mention the following : St. Matt. v. 3 as compared
with St. James i. 9 ; St. Matt. v. 7 with St. James
ii. 13 ; St. Matt. v. 9 with St. James iii. 18 ; St. Matt,
v. 12 with St. James i. 2, and also v. 10 ; St. Matt,
v. 34-37 with St. James v. 12 ; St. Matt. vi. 19 with
St. James v. 2 ; St. Matt. vii. 24-27 with St. James
i. 22 ; 2 St. Matt. xii. 7 with St. James ii. 13;
St. Matt. xxi. 21, 22 with St. James i. 6 ; St. Matt.
xxii. 39 with St. James ii. 8 ; and St. Matt, -raiii. 12
with St. James iv. 6, 10. 8
The references in the 'Book of Eevelation' are
not confined to the Gospel according to St. Matthew,
but extend to the other two Synoptists. Thus, we have
reference to St. Matt. x. 32 in Eev. iii. 5 ; to St. Matt,
xi. 15, and to xiii. 9 and 43 in Eev. ii. 7 ; to St. Mark
1 Holtzmann, Kritik d. Eph. u. Col. brief, pp. 248-250. Most of the
instances there mentioned are certainly very striking, although a few
seem strained.
8 These references to the Sermon on the Mount are peculiarly
interesting.
3 "Wittichen, u. s. p. 64. For other instances, see Canon Westcott,
Introduction to the Study of the Gospels, p. 174, Note 2. In general comp.
ib. pp. 173-179.
LEOT. in. EVIDENCE OF THE GOSPEL NARRATIVES. 71
xni. 22 in Eev. xiii. 13, 14 ; to St. Mark ami. 24, &c.,
in Eev. vi. 12 ; to St. Luke xii. 36-38 in Eev. in. 20 ;
to St. Luke xii. 39, 40 in Eev. iii. 3, and Eev. xvi. 15 ;
and to St. Luke xxiii. 30 in Eev. vi. 16. 1
But all this presents only a small part of the
evidence at our disposal. We can appeal to the
simplicity, vividness, and naturalness of so many
of the Gospel narratives; to their psychological
truthfulness, their internal connection and reference
one to another ; to the utter impossibility of account-
ing for them by notions or expectations prevailing
at the time ; to the agreement between the narratives
in the different Gospels ; to the accordance of the
persons and surroundings with what we know of the
history and the manners of the time, and to. many
little traits which can scarcely be described, but to
which the student of history is sensitive, all bearing
their witness to the Gospels. And beyond it all
stands out the Figure of the historical Christ, as He
was in the days of His Flesh, and as He is to all time
and now : Himself the best evidence of the Gospel
narratives.
And when from this we descend to the position
which even negative criticism concedes to us, we
remember that, according to its admissions, the
earliest document, or documents, in which primitive
tradition found expression dates from less than thirty
* Wittichen, u. 8.
72 PKOPHECY AND HISTORY. raxrr. m.
years after the Crucifixion, and was derived from eye-
witnesses of these events and disciples of Jesus. 1 And
we feel that this canon of our opponents has a far
wider application than they give it : that ' doubt is
only warrantable where scientific reasons can be
asserted for it.' Further, when we examine what,
with frequent forgetfulness of their own canon, the
most advanced of that school have selected out of
our Gospels as the original narrative, 2 we perceive
that, while much more might be inferred from their
own admissions, they have left us quite sufficient to
establish the grounds on which the primitive Church
recognised Jesus as the Messiah promised in the Old
Testament.
2. From this we turn to a far different class of
evidence : that from the testimony of avowed enemies.
We cannot, indeed, expect that either Jews or Romans
would furnish us with details about Christian doc-
trine, unless, in the case of the former, for contro-
versial purposes. But to a certain extent they bear
testimony as to facts and practices, and if their wit-
ness bears out what we find in the New Testament,
this may surely be regarded as giving important
support to the fuller account of such persons, prac-
1 Wittichen, p. 47.
8 I refer here especially to the detailed compilation which Wittichen
has made, while at the same time I would use the strongest expressions
in my power to indicate my absolute disagreement with the conclusion!
at which this critic has arrived.
EECT. m. TALMTJDIO EVIDENCE. 73
tices, or doctrines in the Few Testament itself. We
can only in the briefest manner follow this line of
evidence.
A. The Talmud though containing very early,
even pre-Christian notices, is, as a whole, of much
later date than the New Testament. Moreover, its
statements are utterly unhistorical, and it is charged
with bitter enmity to the new faith. Accordingly
we cannot look for any positive testimony in its
pages. But there are important admissions, ascribed
to Eabbis belonging to the Apostolic or Early Post-
Apostolic age, which are at least negatively of great
evidential value. Thus miracles on the part of Jesus
seem to be admitted, and they are not accounted for
either by delusion or imposture. However accounted
for, we find the belief in the miraculous power of
Jesus confirmed. Indeed, miraculous cures are also
attributed to the disciples of Christ, and the strict
prohibition to avail one's self of them, even if life
itself were in danger, only affords additional evidence
of the general credence of them. Again, we have
undoubted reference to early Christian writings.
Whether allowed or forbidden to be saved from- the
fire and there were voices on either side these
writings had evidently been intended for the read-
ing of Jews, and must therefore have been written
in the Aramaean. Nor can we be mistaken in sup-
posing that they were either documents treating of
74 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. user. m.
the history and claims of Christ, or at any rate con-
nected with the original primitive Christian docu-
ments. A distinct quotation, or rather misquotation,
of St. Matthew v. 17 occurs in Shabb. 116 5, as from
the ' Evangilyon ' which in the word-play not un-
common in Talmudic writings is styled the Aven or
else Avan Gilyon, ' mischief of blank (empty) paper '
(fi^a Jiy, or else pfc). 1 This testimony reaches up into
the first century, and it is comparatively unimportant
for our argument whether the quotation was from
St. Matthew or from a document earlier or later than
our Gospel. 2 Similar remarks apply to what we regard
as a reference to the Gospel of St. John on the part
of Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrqanos. 3 In both cases we
.have to take the lowest standpoint confirmation,
that what we read in the Gospels as the teaching
and mission of Christ formed part of the primitive
belief of the Church. And we feel that in so far
1 Shabb. 116 a. The quotation appears in a curious connection: A
Christian philosopher (judge) under the influence of bribery first arguing
' since your dispersion from your land the Law of Moses has been taken
away and another law given/ and then next day, having received a larger
bribe on the other side, reversing his decision and saying that in the pas-
sage at the end of [following in] the book (the Gospel) he saw it was
written, ' I have come not to diminish from the Law of Moses, nor yet
have I come to add to the Law of Moses.' Professor Delitzsch, Arilag. d.
ersten Evang. p. 22, seems to adopt the reading *D1N? fcOX instead
of x!? 1 !, which would alter the meaning to 'but to add to the Law of
Moses have I come.'
2 See, in general, the brochure of Professor Delitzsch just quoted,
which has much of interest on these points.
3 I must here refer the reader to the quotations and the discussion of
the point in my Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, vol. ii. pp. 193, 194.
LBOI. m. TALMUDIC NOTICES OF THE CHUEOH. 75
they also afford confirmation of the Gospels them-
selves.
The whole subject is so interesting and novel at
any rate to English readers that we may be allowed
to present it, at least in outline, following, so far as
may be, the arguments and admissions of Jewish
writers, 1 in order to avoid controversy.
It is the contention of certain Jewish writers that
at first there was not the same separation between
the Synagogue and the primitive disciples as at a
later period, and that such would not have ensued
had it not been for the Pauline direction and the Anti-
1 I refer here to Joel, JBlicke in d. Relig. Gesch. i. and ii., but especially
to Friedlander, Patrist. u. Talmud. 8tud., whose reasoning I have tried
to follow. I may here he allowed specially to refer to a statement by Joel,
u. s. p. 58, of some interest as regards the criticism of the Synoptic
Gospels, although tinged with that spirit of hypercriticism which cha-
racterises so many writers of that school. Joel maintains that the Talmud
derived its knowledge of the origines of Christianity from such parts of
Evangelic tradition as had reached it, and from what had been witnessed in
the second century. He regards Sanh. xi. 4, and Tos. Sanh. xi. 7, which
enacted that one who had incited to apostacy was to be brought before
the great Sanhedrin in Jerusalem, kept there till one of the great feasts,
and executed on the Feast-day, as an ex post facto Halachah, due to this
that Rabbi Akiba had known from the synoptic tradition that Christ had
been crucified on the Passover Day, and that he had wished to give the
Law for it. This seems to me very doubtful (comp. Siphre on Deut. xxi.
22). Still more so is the explanation that what he regards as a younger
Mishnah Sanh iv. 1, which orders that a process involving life or death
was not to be begun on the eve of a Sabbath or of a feast day, was brought
in, because the fourth Gospel places (according to Joel) the death of Christ
on the day before the feast. This is quite too ingenious besides being
wholly unsupported. But even if the theory of the origin of those
Mishnahs were correct, Sanh. iv. 1 might as readily be ascribed to the
desire of controverting the Evangelical tradition about the death of Christ,
as to any regard for the supposed chronology of the fourth Gospel.
76 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. MOT. m.
Jewish Gentile movement which was its sequence.
We mark the concessions which this implies, while
we emphatically deny that what is called the ' Pauline
direction ' is correctly represented in them. And we
recall the account in the Book of Acts of the bitter
hostility to the infant Church, and the consequent
persecutions, which preceded the so-called ' Pauline
direction,' and in which, indeed, Saul of Tarsus was
himself a principal agent. But we also know that
this enmity actually preceded the Death of Christ,
and was the cause of it. And as regards the teaching
of St. Paul, we are prepared to maintain that, through-
out, it had its root and spring in the teaching of the
Master concerning traditionalism and Pharisaism.
But this in their contention is certainly true, that at
first there was much more close religious intercourse
between Jews and Christians. Nay, to quote the
words of a recent Jewish writer l j ' It cannot be
denied that the movement which originated within
Judaism, and attached itself to the Name of Jesus,
drew for a short time also many of the Teachers of
the Law into the vortex.'
As a further fact against the Jewish assertion,
that Judaism stood in close peaceful relation to the
primitive Church, we must here take note of their
own admission, that Gentile and Jewish Christian con-
troversialists received far different treatment at the
1 Friedlander, u. 0. p. 78.
SHtf. m. RABBIS AND EARLY CHRISTIANS. 77
hands of the Synagogue. The former were treated
with a kind of benevolent pity; the. latter provoked
the bitterest hostility, 1 to such extent that the
people were warned against all intercourse with
those who were regarded as blasphemers. 2 At the
same time we mark differences in the statements of
the Eabbis concerning such intercourse, and this,
not only on the part of different teachers", but even
of the same teachers, apparently on different occa-
sions. In general, the principle prevailed that no
intercourse of any kind should be held with those
heretics ; and that even the preservation of life might
not be sought by their healing. 3 Sacred as the occur-
rence of the Divine Name was to the Jew, the Eabbis
would have deemed it duty to burn the Gospels and
similar heretical books, even though containing the
hallowed mention ; nay, they would rather have
fled into a heathen temple for protection from a
murderer or a serpent, than taken refuge among
Christians. 4
In other circumstances, however, opinions would
appear changed. At the end of the third and be-
ginning of the fourth century, when Christianity had
already become a power, we find that the celebrated
Eabbi Abbahu not only called in Christian medical
1 Friedlander, u. s. pp. 62, 67, 68.
9 So even Tryphon in Justin's Dial., c. 38.
8 Ab.Z.276. 4 Shablb. 116 a.
78 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. EEC*. JE,
aid, though his colleagues happily averted his
purpose, which the Talmud declares would have led
to his being killed ; but that, when asked whether the
writings of the heretics might on the Sabbath be saved
from the fire, he replied sometimes affirmatively,
at others negatively. But then this Eabbi Abbahu
was a sort of ideal personage : handsome, liberal,
who favoured Grecian culture, lived at Cassarea, and
was in favour with the Eoman authorities. While
the Jewish Patriarchate had sunk very low under
Gamaliel IV., Abbahu was a sage among sages,
and, what was most meritorious, he knew how to
inflict the most crushing defeats upon the JSTazarenes. 1
No wonder that, according to Talmudic story, the
Christians would fain have done away with him a
fate which, as we have seen, was only averted by
the timely intervention of his colleagues.
To be sure, they must have been very peculiar
controversialists those Christians, if we are to credit
the Talmudic accounts of their ratiocination. But,
although neither the Christian philosopher nor yet
the Jew Tryphon in Justin's ' Dialogue' seems power-
ful in argument, it is scarcely possible to conceive
that statements so utterly puerile as the Talmudists
report should have been urged in serious contro-
versy. ISTo wonder the Midrash applied to them the
opening words of Eccl. i. 8, declaring these argu-
1 Abb. Z, 28 a.
IBCT. ni. JEWISH AND CHRISTIAN CONTROVERSY. 79*
ments wearisome, wearing ; l nor yet, that when the
colleagues of another noted Kabbinic controversialist,
Joshua ben Ohananyah, 2 mourned, as he lay dying,
that now there would not be any to resist the daring
of the Christians, the dying teacher should have
comforted them by saying, that if their council had
perished, the wisdom of their opponents had become
rotten. 3 But the Midrash on Eccl. i. 8 tells us many
things which seem to indicate that the words of these
heretics must have been more weighty than the
arguments reported by the Eabbis. Thus, we find
the great Eliezer ben Hyrqanos 4 was so gravely sus-
pected as to be actually arraigned before the civil
magistrate on the charge of Christianity, from which
accusation he only escaped by a misunderstanding on
the part of the magistrate. 5 In truth he made certain-
important admissions in regard to it. Thus, when
his disciples in vain endeavoured to comfort him
in his deep sorrow, the Great Eabbi Akiba at last
suggested, that Eliezer might on some occasion have
listened with pleasure to an exposition by the
heretics. The Talmud relates this interpretation,
which will scarcely bear repetition. But in view
1 Qohel. R. ed. Warsh, p. 80 a.
2 Comp. on this point also Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, vol. ii.
p. 194.
3 Chag. 55. * u. s. pp. 193, 194.
5 Ab. Z. 16 6. The words of Eliezer which gave rise to the mis
understanding have been differently rendered by Jewish scholars. Comp.
Toettermann, Eliea. b. Hire. p. 21.
80 PROPHECY AND HlSTOEY. LBOT. ttr,
of what we have recorded in another place con-
cerning Eliezer, and what we regard as his refer-
ences to St. John's Grospel, 1 we may be allowed
to doubt whether it represents the whole that had
passed. We can scarcely suppose an Eliezer affected
by discussions, concerning many of which the Eab-
binic students could question their teacher in such
terms as these, that he had driven back his oppo-
nents with a straw, but what had he to say to
them ? 2 And in truth the remark of these disciples
as to the insufficiency of such replies seems well
founded, and, at least on the occasion here referred
to, the Christian argument must have turned on the
most important points. 3
Eliezer was the brother-in-law of Gamaliel II.,
and nourished in the first century. He may have
been acquainted with Saul of Tarsus. His citation
before the magistrate for suspected Christianity took
place during the Trajan persecution. This brings
us to the period of Pliny, whom we shall presently
adduce as a witness in our favour. It thus connects,
in a most interesting manner, the story of the Jewish
Rabbi with the evidence of the heathen governor.
Meanwhile, I can only express my personal belief
1 See the account in my Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, vol. ii.
pp. 193, 194.
8 Ber. R. 8, ed. Warsh. p. 18 a ; Comp. Sanh. 38 b.
8 It seems, in fact, to have "been a Scriptural discussion on the
Plurality of Persons in the Divine Being.
. tit, RABBIS AftD EARLY CHEISTtANS. 81
that tlie excommunication which the Eabbis laid
upon Eliezer, and their opposition to his teaching,
must have been due to far weightier causes than
such differences of teaching as are recorded, and
which were never otherwise visited with such punish-
ment. 1 But Eabbi Eliezer was not the only great
teacher affected by the Christian movement, nor
yet Eabbis Abbahu and Joshua ben Ohananyah the
only Jewish controversialists. Eabbi Saphra, whom
Abbahu had praised to the Jewish Christians in most
extravagant terms, was apparently worsted by them
in an argument based on Amos iii. 2, which, I
presume, they must have quoted by way of urging
that some great national sin must rest on Israel to
account for the sufferings that had come upon them. 2
But we can ascend to an earlier age for evidence
of Christian influence on Jewish teachers. As a
Jewish writer argues, 3 Akiba would not have sug-
gested to Eliezer the possibility of such a cause of
his misfortunes, if intercourse and discussions with
Jewish Christians had been of only exceptional
occurrence. Eabbi Ishmael belonged to the illus-
trious circle of sages who flourished after the destruc-
tion of Jerusalem. In his hatred of Jewish Christians
1 The whole of this subject is very ably discussed by Toettermann.
2 Ab. Z. 4 a. This inference is, of course, my own. In the Talmud
Abbahu is represented as giving by a parabolic illustration a satisfactory
explanation of the verse.
3 Friedlander, u. s., p. 77.
G
82 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. EEOT.
and desire to see their sacred writings burned, he
yielded nothing to his colleague, Tarphon. 1 Never-
theless, his almost equally learned nephew, Ben
Dama, solicited his permission to study ' Grecian
wisdom ' [nw ntsan] may it not have been Christian
writings? and was in such relationship towards
Jewish Christians, that, when bitten by -a serpent,
he would fain have availed himself of the miraculous
healing by one of them, appealing to Scripture for
its lawfulness, but was prevented by his uncle, and
so perished. 2 A similar story is told of Eabbi
Joshua, one of the most celebrated teachers, and
who, in his youth, was said to have been among
the Levite singers in the Temple. 3 His nephew,
Chanina, came under the influence of the Chris-
tians of Capernaum ; and, to withdraw him from it,
his uncle had to send him to Babylonia, where he
afterwards exercised the greatest influence. 4 The
same Eabbi Joshua is said to have also rescued a
disciple of Eabbi Jonathan from the toils of the
heretics. The details of the story will scarcely bear
repetition. If true, the Christians, by whom the
young Eabbi had been entangled, must have been
1 Comp. Shabb. 116 a. 2 Oomp. Abh. Z. 27 b, Midr. on Eccl. i. 9.
3 In general, see the collation of passages giving his history in the
Seder Haddoroth, ed. "Warsh. 1878; part ii. p. 93 a, col. b.
4 Midr. on Eccl. i. 9. And yet Ber. 63 a shows that he was not in
good relations with Palestine, while the conjunction of his name in
that passage with those of Abbahu and Saphra may have a peculiar
meaning.
. in.
CHRISTIANITY AND THE SYNAGOGUE. 83
Mcolaitans. But there is more than this to be told.
The ordinance of the patriarch Gamaliel (II.), which
directed that thenceforth admission to the Academy
should only be allowed to such whose 'interior'
was like their exterior,' * has been understood to
refer at least in part to the fact that many who
frequented the Eabbinic schools were under the
influence of the new faith, and would have spread
the new opinions. 2 This affords striking evidence of
the effect which Christianity exercised at its rise upon
very many of the best Jewish minds, and gives con-
firmation to the account of the spread of the faith in
the opening chapters of the Book of Acts. Nay, there
is evidence that ' heretical,' that is, Christian, prayers
were sometimes actually introduced into the worship
of the Synagogue by those who led the devotions,
against which the sharpest precautions were to be
taken. 3 Surely, then, Christianity must have had
many and most influential adherents among the Jews"
at its rise.
But even so the evidence is not complete. We
find that the same Gamaliel put to the assembled
sages the question, which of them could compose a
prayer against the new faith which should be inserted
in the most solemn part ol the worship the so-called
* Bar. 28o.
a Oomp. Freudenthal, p. 78, and especially p, 141, note 11.
8 Ber. 29 a, 33 , 34 a.
84 PROPHECY AND HISTOEY. IEOT. ni.
eighteen benedictions. It has been well argued that
while the necessity for, and the introduction of such
a prayer in the liturgy are in themselves most sig-
nificant, the appeal of the patriarch to the sages must
have implied the challenge not which of them
could, but which of them would, compose such a
prayer. And, indeed, the correct repetition of this
formula was henceforth made a test of orthodoxy. 1
But perhaps the best practical proof of the existence
of such intercourse and influence is this, that appar-
ently there were meeting-places for regular religious
discussions, and that a special literature seems to
have been the outcome of them. The former are
mentioned under a twofold name : probably desig-
nating assemblies of different character. It is not
easy to understand the precise meaning and distinc-
tion of these two designations. We read of the Be
Abhidan (' House of Abhidan '), and of * the writings
of the Be Abhidan ; ' and we also read of the Be
Notsrephi or Nitsrephi (* House of Notsrephi '). 2 Both
1 Ber. 28 5, 29 . la connection with this there is a curious and
enigmatic story about the author of this formula having forgotten it next
year, and requiring several hours to recall it. The contest also is some-
what mysterious, and almost seems to point to hesitation about the
whole matter. The remarks of Joel on the subject (ii. 93, 94) are not
quite satisfactory.
3 See here Delitzsch, u. s. pp. 19, 90 ; Fiirst, Kultur u. Lit. Gesch.
p. 235, note 741 ; Dukes, Ralib. Slumenlese, p. 163 ; Levy, Neuhebr,
Worterb. vols. i. and iii. sub voc. ; and especially the Aruch, ed. Kohut,
vol. ii. pp. 45-47. Joel, u. s. ii. pp. 91, 92, strongly maintains that the
Be Abhidan referred simply and exclusively to Ebionite meetings. On
this occasion he makes an interesting and not unlikely suggestion as
EOT.m. MEETINGS FOE RELIGIOUS DISCUSSION. 85
names seem corruptions of other words, or, rather,
as the custom was, word- puns by which a name was
converted into an opprobrious epithet. 1 They are
universally regarded as having been places for re-
ligious discussions between Jews and Christians of
different parties. The Be Abhidan is supposed to
represent a corruption of Ebionites (pa=3V3),
although the Ebionites were also known by their
proper name ; 2 or it may possibly refer to a Gnostic
sect, such as the Ophites. 3 On the other hand, it is
easy to recognise in the Be Notsrephi a perversion of
the term Be Notsri, Christian, and to see in it a desig-
nation of the Church. The subject is not, however,
wholly free from difficulty. The Talmud describes
one sage (Samuel) as going to the Be Abhidan, but
not to the Be Notsrephi, while another (Eabh) would
to the origin of the name Minim (heretics) for Christians. He supposes
that the original designation for those Jews who believed in Jesus was
Maaminim, which he regards as equivalent to Trto-roi, and that, when the
hostility towards the Christians began, the first part of the word was
dropped, and the Christians were called Minim, which would mean the
adherents of a falsehood.
1 This is not the place to speculate as to the words from which these
puns may have been derived. No doubt they were intended as opprobrious
designations.
2 In Baba K. 117 a, R,. Huna is said to have arrived Wltf ^1?.
3 In the Targum pTQ stands for nvdav. Bat as in one of the
three Talmudic passages in which Be Abhidan is mentioned (Shabb. 152 a ;
the other two are Shabb. 116 a, Abh. Z. 17 b}, the Emperor (Hadrian) is
said to have questioned R. Joshua why he did not attend those dis-
cussions, the inference seems suggested that general religious disputations
may also have been held in those places. For the reason stated by
Levy (vol. i. p. 9 5), it seems impossible to suppose that Parsee doctrines
were there discussed.
86 JPROMECi? AND HISTOftt. IBOT. rrt.
not attend the former, much less the latter. 1 Other
Eabbis plead age and fear of suffering bodily injury as
excuse for their absence from such meetings. And
we can readily believe that gatherings for discussion
may, among hot-blooded Easterns, have often ended
in scenes of violence. Indeed, one Eabbi tells us that
he had agreed with his theological opponents that
the victor in controversy should be allowed to take
bloody vengeance on his adversary, which the. suc-
cessful Eabbi had also done, although this seems to
have required considerable effort whether of the
theological or physical kind, does not clearly appear.
To sum up at least some of the results of this long
digression. While admitting that Talmudic writings
are utterly untrustworthy as regards historical ac-
curacy, this much at least seems established from
them, that miraculous power of healing was attri-
buted to Jesus and to the early Christians ; that their
sacred writings presumably in Aramasan existed,
were known, and circulated ; that there was exten-
sive religious communication between the disciples of
Christ and the most eminent Teachers of the Law,
and frequent, if not regular, discussions with them ;
and that many of the leaders of the Jewish world,
and naturally many more of the people, were affected
by the new movement. In fact, it was supposed that
Divine punishment had visited a great Eabbi who
1 Shato. 116 a.
MOT. m. THE TESTIMONY OF JOSEPHUS. B7
confessed to having derived pleasure from their in-
terpretations ; while others had to flee or to die, in
order to escape the dangerous heresy. Even to hold
intercourse with these heretics, who were for ever
excluded from eternal life, was regarded as already
the first step towards becoming a Christian convert,
and was to be carefully avoided.
Thus far all accords with the impressions derived
from the Christian records. But we have other and
more direct evidence to produce.
B. From the Talmud we pass to the Jewish his-
torian Josephus, whom we may describe as in early
life the contemporary of St. Paul. Indeed, there
is ground for believing that, as a young man, Josephus
was in Rome during St. Paul's first imprisonment
there.- 1 His systematic ignoring of Christianity will
scarcely seem strange when we remember the cha-
racter of the man, the ulterior object of his writings,
and the relations between Christianity and Judaism,
on the one hand, and heathenism, on the other. But
there are three passages in the works of Josephus,
occurring in all existing manuscripts, which bear
testimony respectively to John the Baptist, 2 to James
the brother of Jesus, 3 and to Christ Himself. 4 With-
out entering on detailed criticism, suffice it to say
1 On the life, writings, and testimony of Josephus I must take leave
to refer to my article in Smith and Wace's Dictionm'y of Biography
vol. iii. pp. 441-460.
* Ant. xviii. 5. 2. 8 Ant. xx. 9. 1. * Ant. xviii. 3. 3.
AND HISTORY. user, nt
that, while the passage about Christ must have had
some genuine substratum, 1 it appears to be so altered
and interpolated in its present form as for all prac-
tical purposes to be spurious. More credit attaches
to the passage about James, the Lord's brother.
But even this is in its present form so doubtful
that we prefer leaving it unnoticed, as, in any case,
not affecting the present argument. On the other
hand, sober-minded critics of all schools are now
generally agreed that the passage in Josephus con-
cerning John the Baptist is genuine and trustworthy. 2
For evidential purposes 3 it may be described as
1 This is substantially the conclusion of most modern critics, such as
Ewald, Renan, Joel. The latter (u. s. ii, p. 52) says, not without pre-
sumptive good reason, that the writings of Josephus may originally have
contained more than our present copies. But he goes beyond the
bounds of the likely when he suggests extensive falsifications, especially
in regard to the Pharisees.
8 Even Wittichen, Leben Jesu, p. 4, declares it, 'without doubt
authentic ; ' so also Dr. Mill in his classical work on the Myth.
Interpret, of the Gospels, p. 289, note 36, and Lardner, in hia Coll.
of Jewish and Heathen Testim. (Works, vol. vii. pp. 113-119). In
general, the remarks of Dr. Mill on those passages in Josephus (u. s. pp.
289-292), and the whole chapter in Lardner 's great work (pp. 113-137,
ed. 1788) should be carefully considered by students.
3 The passage in Josephus concerning the Baptist reads as follows :
But to some of the Jews it appeared that the destruction of Herod's
army came from God, and, indeed, as a just punishment on account of
what had been done to John, who was surnamed the . Baptist. For
Herod ordered him to be killed, who was a good man and had called
upon the Jews to exercise virtue, both as to righteousness towards one
another and piety towards God, and so to come to baptism. For so would
the baptising be acceptable to Him if they made use of it, not for the
putting away (remission, expiation) of some sins, but for the purification
of the body after the soul had been previously cleansed by righteousness.
m.
THE TESTIMONY OF JOSEPHUS.
bearing testimony on these four points: 1st, the
exalted character of John and his preaching of re-
pentance ; 2ndly, his baptism and its relation to the
forgiveness of sins; Srdly, the crowds which from
all parts flocked to him and were deeply moved by
his preaching ; and, lastly, that John was executed by
Herod, because he feared that the preaching of the
Baptist might issue in a new movement or rebellion
against himself, since the people ' seemed ready to do
anything by his counsel.'
This fourfold testimony covers, with one excep-
tion, all the main facts recorded in the Gospels about
the Baptist, although with such variations as we
might expect from the standpoint of the Jewish his-
torian. Thus far, then, it affords important confirma-
tion of the Gospel history. And even the notable
omission to which we have referred, that of any
allusion, to the announcement by the Baptist of the
coming Messianic Kingdom, is rather apparent than
real. For this rebellion which Herod is said to have
dreaded, in consequence of the people's readiness to
do anything by John's counsel, must have referred
to his proclamation of the near Advent of the Mes-
And when others came in crowds, for they were exceedingly moved by
hearing these words, Herod, fearing lest such influence of his over the
people might lead to some rebellion, for they seemed ready to do any-
thing by his counsel, deemed it best, before any new movement should
happen through him, to put him to death, rather than that when a change
in affairs (revolution) had come he might have to repent the mischief
into which he had fallen (when it should be too late).
90 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. MOT.
sianic Kingdom and King. Josephus does not give
a hint of any political element in the preaching of
John ; on the contrary, he sums it up as enjoining
* righteousness towards one another, and piety to-
wards God,' ' and so to come to baptism.' If there-
fore a new political movement was apprehended from
such preaching, the inference seems almost irre-
sistible that John had announced the near Kingdom.
And here we remember that the claims of Jesus to
the Messiahship gave rise to the charge of setting
up another King, and that the bare suggestion of
the birth of such a Messiah so excited the fears of
Herod's father as to lead to the murder of the Inno-
cents at Bethlehem. And, even at the last, when
such a claim might seem almost impossible, Pilate
discussed it with Jesus ; and such deep hold had it
taken, that at a later period Domitian summoned the
relatives of Jesus to his presence, to see whether their
appearance betokened danger to his sovereignty.
Hence we can readily believe that this would, under
Pharisaic instigation of his fears, be the deeper motive
in Herod's conduct towards the Baptist, and that
the reproof about Herodias would only represent the
climax of offence, and the final occasion of the Bap-
tist's imprisonment. 1 Thus viewed, the silence of
Josephus on what would have obliged him to refer to
Christianity is itself of evidential value.
1 Comp. Schiirer, Neutest. Zdtgeseh. pp. 238, 239.
LECT. in. THE TESTIMONY OF JOSEPHUS. 91
But there is even more to be learned from the
testimony of Josephus. It not only attests, and that by
a witness hostile to Christianity, the exalted character
of the Baptist, and implies his announcement of the
near Messianic Kingdom, but it affords at least in-
direct evidence that Jesus brought something new, in-
stituted a new kingdom, such as we know it from the
Gospels. We infer this not only from what Josephus
records as the subject-matter of John's preaching,
but from the rite of baptism which, according to his
testimony, John had instituted. We need not here
discuss the historically untenable suggestion that
the Baptist or his baptism were connected with
Essenism. Suffice it to say, that the baptism of the
Essenes was not for the people generally, but for the
initiated ; not once for repentance, but daily for
superior sanctity. Indeed, Essenism had nothing to
say to men, except to come out and join the Sect ;
and it fundamentally differed, on almost all important
points, from the teaching of John. But if the preach-
ing and baptism of John were not Essene, neither
were they Judaic. Kabbinism knows no preaching
of repentance such as that to which John called his
hearers, or, as Josephus describes it, wherein what
the Eabbis would have denounced as sinners the
unlearned, soldiers, and publicans would have been
allowed to continue in their condition, only with
changed minds and conduct. Nor was any such
PROPHECY AtfJ) HISTORY. EBOS. lit.
baptism either practised or known in Judaism.
There were the legal washings connected with Levit-
ical defilements, and the baptism of heathens on be-
coming Proselytes of Bighteousness. But a baptism
of Jews as connected with repentance was "wholly
unprecedented. It inaugurated something different
from all the past, something new. Whether viewed
in connection with the typical purification prepara-
tory to Israel's reception of the Law at Mount Sinai,
or as symbolic of the better washing in the language
of Josephus, ' after that the soul had previously been
cleansed by righteousness ' it marked the commence-
ment of a new development, the preparation for a
new kingdom, in which righteousness would reign.
And in this respect also the silence of Josephus is
most significant. Thus, when read in connection
with the Gospel narrative, the language of Josephus
not only implies the Baptist's proclamation of the
coining Messiah, but also that He would found a new
kingdom for which baptism was the appropriate
preparation.
0. One step still remains. We have had testimony
from hostile, and certainly not impartial Jews ; we
shall now have it from, a hostile but impartial heathen.
We have been carried to the threshold of the history
of Jesus, and have had a look forward into it; we
shall now be transported to the period after His
death, and from that standpoint have a look back-
EBCT. m. THE EPISTLE OF PLINY. 93
wards on the Gospel narrative. The testimony of
Josephus covers the period from the time of St. Paul
to that of Trajan more exactly from A.D. 37 or 38
to after the year 100 of our era. But before that
period expires the testimony of another unimpeached
and unimpeachable witness begins. I allude here to
the well-known Epistle which Pliny the Younger ad-
dressed to the Emperor Trajan, 1 The facts are briefly
as follows. Under the reign of Trajan (98-117), the
younger Pliny, who had already filled the highest
offices, became Governor of Bithynia. The precise
date of his governorship, and consequently of his
Epistle to the Emperor about the Christians, is not
quite certain, though the possible difference is only
that of a few years say, between 106 and 111 A.D.
But this does not adequately represent the state of
the case. Eor, as some of those by whose examina-
tion Pliny ascertained the tenets and practices of the
Christians had left the Christian community so long as
1 The evidential value of the statements of Tacitus (Ann. xv. 44) has
been very moderately set forth by Wittichen (comp. Lardner, u. s. pp.
253-255). They attest the origin of Christianity in Judaea by Christ;
the crucifixion of Christ by Pontius Pilate in the reign of Tiberius ; the
revival of the movement which seemed suppressed ; its transplantation to
Rome, its separation from the Synagogue ; and its opposition to heathen-
ism. [Wittichen accentuates, although on insufficient grounds, that the
Christians are charged not with scelera, or crimes, but -w'rihjlagilia.~] On
the epistle of Pliny comp. Lardner, u. s. pp. 287-318. The Latin text
is given at the end of this Lecture. Joel (Blicke in d. Heliff. Gesch. ii,
passim, but especially Sect, v.) has, in my view, without sufficient reason,
denied the existence of a sharply-defined distinction between the
Synagogue and the Church at the time of Nero.
94 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. HBOC. in.
twenty years previously, tlie testimony of the younger
Pliny concerning Christianity really reaches up to
between 86 and 90 of our era that is, to more
than ten years before the death of Josephus. 1 The
two witnesses are, therefore, so to speak, historically
connected.
The chief points in the information supplied by
the Epistle of Pliny may be summarised as follows :
The Governor applies to the Emperor for guidance,
being in doubt what conduct to pursue towards the
Christians. He had not previously been present at
any judicial examination of Christians (which at least
shows that they were well known), and did not well
know with what strictness to bear himself in the
matter. Hitherto his practice had been to question
the accused, and if they professed themselves Chris-
tians, to repeat the question a second and third time,
threatening the punishment of death. Those who
remained constant were forthwith punished ; this, not
so much on account of their opinions, of which he
seemed still in doubt, as for their obstinacy. But
Christianity only spread, and Pliny was beset with
anonymous as well as regular information against
many, of all ages, of every rank, and of both sexes.
Of the persons thus brought before Pliny's tribunal,
many denied being Christians, when he applied the
1 The supposed silence of Josephus can, therefore, not be of any
evidential force against Christianity.
EECT. ra. THE EPISTLE OF PLINY. 95
crucial test of making them offer heathen worship,
and revile the Name of Christ ; neither of which, as
he had learned, Christians would do under any com-
pulsion. Others admitted having been Christians,
but professed to have left the community three or
more, and some even more than twenty years before.
Although these persons had no hesitation in per-
forming heathen rites, and reviling Christ, they main-
tained that even while Christians their practices had
been wholly harmless, such as Pliny proceeds to
describe. And, to be quite sure of it, Pliny next
subjected two of the actual Deaconesses to torture,
but elicited nothing beyond c a depraved and excessive
superstition' (superstitionem pravam et immodicarri).
In these circumstances, and finding that the number
of those who would have to suffer was far greater
than he had imagined, and that the new faith had
not only taken hold on the towns and villages, but
even spread to the country districts, Pliny applies to
the Emperor for direction.
Putting aside our natural feeling of indignation
at the conduct of Pliny towards those of both sexes,
and of all ages and ranks, who were faithful to their
convictions unto torture and death, let us see what
light this unquestioned historical document which
takes us, say, to about half a century after the death
of Christ casts on the New Testament record.
1. It tells us of a vast number of believers, in all
96 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. SECT. vs.
ranks and of all ages, in the province over which
Pliny ruled. According to his account, ' the temples
had been almost forsaken ; ' their sacred solemnities
intermitted, and it was the most rare thing to find
purchasers for the victims (rarissimus emptor inveni-
ebatur).
2. As regards the tenets, or rather the observances,
of the Christians, we cannot, indeed, expect to derive
precise dogmatic statements from criminal informa-
tions laid before a heathen judge. The confession of
the two Deaconesses under torture may have contained
an account of their faith. Pliny describes it as a
' debased and excessive superstition.' But the account
given by apostates bore reference to the practices of
Christians. It deserves special notice that even these
persons had nothing evil to say of their former co-
religionists. But what they report of their practices
is most instructive.
a. The Christians are described as meeting for
worship on a stated day. It is impossible to avoid
the inference that this was the first day of the week ;
and as its corollary, that this day was observed as the
memorial of Christ's Eesurrection. Thus, the Sunday
worship and the underlying belief in the Eesurrection,
are attested within about half a century of the death
of Jesus.
b. They are said on these occasions to have offered
Divine Worship to Christ, and this, whether we
EEOT. nt THE TESTIMONY OF PUNY. 97
understand the language of Pliny as denoting speci-
fically the singing of hymns or the offering of prayer, 1
to Christ as to a God (quasi Deo). Let it be remem-
bered that Pliny here reports the testimony of former
Christians, and hence cannot be understood as meaning
that the Christians worshipped Jesus as a God in the
same sense in which Pliny would offer worship to the
Emperor. Moreover, it must be kept in view that,
according to Pliny, it was distinctive of these same
Christians rather to suffer martyrdom than to offer
even the supposed inferior homage to the Eoman
Emperor, although they fully owned his supreme
civil authority. Hence the Christian worship of Jesus
must have been consciously and literally offered to
Christ as a Divine Person. We have, therefore,
testimony that the central point in their worship
that which these former Christians singled out as the
distinctive characteristic, was worship of Jesus, with
the underlying tenet that He was the Son of God,
Yery God of Very God/
c. They are said on these occasions to have bound
themselves ' by an oath ' (sacramento), against the
commission of all crime or sin, and to all truthfulness
and uprightness. We would suggest that this ' oath,'
at their solemn meetings, must bear some reference to
moral obligations undertaken at the Holy Communion.
In any case, we have here testimony of the distinctive
1 See here Lardner, u, &, p. 808,
98 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. EEOT. m.
holiness of the early Christians, as organically con-
nected with their worship and belief ; in short, to
the moral theology of the New Testament as the
outcome of its dogmatic teaching.
d. Lastly, we have in the account of these former
Christians a notice of certain common meals not in
the worship of the Christians, but after it referring
probably to the love-feasts or agapes of 1 Corin-
thians. "We are the more confirmed in this view,
since these common meals, seem to have been re-
garded as not of vital importance, for they are said to
have been intermitted after the publication of Pliny's
edict.
The importance of the historic testimony just
analysed can scarcely be overrated. It not only gives
historic reality to the picture of the early Church,
such as from the New Testament we would trace its
outlines ; but it fully confirms the power and spread of
the new faith, as the Book of Acts and the Apostolic
Epistles set them before us. Moreover, it presents, in
regard to the Eesurrection as the great central truth
of Christian faith, the Person of Christ as the grand
central Object of Christian worship, and the Holy
Eucharist as the main part of Christian ritual, the
exact counterpart of the New Testament account.
The Christianity of the year 86 or 90 of our era is, so
to speak, the coin which bears the device of the mint
of the New Testament. If we were to translate into
EEOT. in. THE CHURCH OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 99
fact the history which closes with the four Gospels
say in the year 30 of our era we would have pre-
cisely Pliny's account of the Christians in the year
86 or 90. We have here the Sunday worship, with
its look back on the Eesurrection, and therefore
upon the Crucifixion, the Incarnation, and Messianic
activity of Jesus ; the Divine Worship of Christ, with
its upward look to the Saviour at the Eight Hand of
the Eather, having all power ; the earnest, conscious
striving against all sin and after all holiness, amidst
the corrupt, festering mass of heathenism around a
new creation in Christ Jesus by the Holy Ghost, whose
living temples Christians are, and this as an integral
part of their worship, the outcome of their faith ; then,
the simple common meetings for prayer and the Holy
Sacrament, and, when possible, love-feasts of brotherly
fellowship ; finally, the enduring perseverance of the
Church, even to the loss of all things and to death itself.
Narrow as the line of evidence may seem which
we have followed, it has, we trust, fully established
the main proposition of this Lecture. What we have
learned about the Gospels has not in any part been
invalidated, but in many respects confirmed, by such
trustworthy notices as we have gathered from Tal-
mudic writings. Then, the testimony of Josephus
concerning John and his Baptism has flashed light
forward on the beginning of Christ's Ministry, on its
object and character ; whilst the testimony of Pliny
H2
100 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. IECT. m.
has flashed light backwards to the end of Christ's
Ministry, to His Eesurrection, and to the faith and
practice of the early Church. John the Baptist and
Jesus Christ are true historical personages, and the
influence of their activity is precisely such as the New
Testament describes it. And what we have learned
about the power of Christianity and its spread, about
the life of Christians, and their readiness to be faithful
unto death, sets before us in vivid colouring an his-
torical picture of that primitive Church which saw
in Jesus of Nazareth the fulfilment of the Old Testa-
ment promises, and the reality of that kingdom which
had been the hope of the Fathers.
NOTE TO LECTURE III.
Text of the letter of Pliny the Younger to the Emperor Trajan. 1
0. Plinius Trajano, Solemne estmihi, Domine, omnia, deiquibua
dubito, ad Te referre. Quis enim potest melius vel cunctationem
meam regere, vel ignorantiam instruere ? Cognitionibus de Chris-
tianis interfui nunquam : ideo nescio, quid et quatenus aut puniri
soleat, aut quseri. Nee mediocriter hsesitavi, sitne aliquod dis-
criraen setaturn, an quamlibet teneri nihil a robustioribus differant :
deturne pcenitentise venia, an ei, qui omnino Christianus fuit,
desisse non prosit: nomen ipsum, si flagitiis careat, an flagitia
cohcerentia nomini puniantur. Interim in iis, qxii ad me tanquam
Christiani deferebantur, hunc sum secutus modum. Interrogavi
ipsos, an essent Christiani : confitentes iterumactertio interrogavi,
supplicium minatus : perseverantes duci jussi. Neque enim dubi
1 Plinii,lib. x. epist. 96 [al. 97],
EBOT.ni. THE EPISTLE OF PUN5T. 101
tabam, qualecunque esset quod faterentur, pertinaciam certe et
inflexibilem obstinationem debere puniri. Fuerunt alii similis
amentias : quos, quia cives Romani erant, annotavi in urbem
remittendos. Mox ipso tractatu, ut fieri solet, diffundente se
crimine, plures species inciderunt. Propositus est libellus sine auc-
tore, multorum nomina continens, qui negarent, esse se Christianos
aut fuisse. Cum prseeunte me Deos appellarent, et imagini Tuse,
quam propter hoc jusseram cum simulacris numinum afferri,
thure ac vino supplicarent, prseterea maledicerent Christo, qxiorum
nihil cogi posse dicuntur, qui sunt revera Christiani, dimittendos
esse putavi. Alii ab indice nominati, esse se Christianos dixe-
runt, et mox negaverunt : fuisse quideni, sed desisse, quidam
ante triennium, quidam ante plures annos, non nemo etiam ante
viginti quoque. Omnes et imaginem Tuam, Deorumque simulacra
venerati sunt : ii et Christo maledixerunt. Affirniabant autem,
hanc fuisse summam vel culpse suse, vel erroris, quod essent soliti
stato die ante lucem convenire, carmenque Christo, quasi Deo,
dicere secum invicem : seque sacramento, non in scelus aliquod
obstringere, sed ne furta, ne latrocinia, ne adulteria committerent,
ne fidem fallerent, ne depositum appellati abnegarent; quibus
peractis morem sibi discedendi fuisse, rursusque coeundi ad capi-
endum cibum, promiscuum tamen et innoxium ; quod ipsxim facere
desisse post edictum meum, quo secundum mandata Tua hetserias
esse vetueram. Quo magis necessarium credidi, ex dnabus ancillis,
quse ministrse dicebantur, quid esset veri, et per tormenta qneerere.
Sed nihil aliud inveni, quam superstitionem pravam et immodi-
cam : ideoque dilata cognitione ad consulendum Te decurri. Visa est
enim mihi res digna consultatione, maxime propter periclitantium
numerum. Multi enim omnis setatis, omnis ordinis, utriusque
sexus etiam, vocantur in periculum, *et vocabuntur. Neque enim
civitates tantum, sed vicos etiam atque agros superstitionis istixis
contagio pervagata est. Quse videtur sisti et corrigi posse. Certe
satis constatj prope jam desolata templa coepisse celebrari, et sacra
solemnia diu intermissa repeti, pastumque venire victimarum, cujus
adhuc rarissimus emtor inveniebatur. Ex quo facile est opinari,
quse turba hominum emendari possit, si sit pcenitentisB locus.
102 PROPHECY AND HISTORY tntt IV,
LEOTUKE IV. 1
ON SOME FUNDAMENTAL PKINCTPLES EEGAEDTNG THE STUDY
OF PROPHECY AND ITS FULFILMENT, TOGETHER WITH KE-
MARKS ON CERTAIN SPECIAL PROPHECIES.
He shall grow as a root out of a dry ground. Is. liii. 2.
I pray thee, of whom speaketh the Prophet this ? ACTS viii. 34.
IN the preceding Lecture I have endeavoured to
meet an objection which, if established, would have
been fatal to our whole reasoning. Having thus, so
to speak, cleared the ground before us, we can pro-
ceed with our main argument. Nor could we rest it
on better foundation than the two Scripture passages
just quoted, of which the one points to the grand
central Figure in Old Testament prophecy ; while
the other refers to the question of its counterpart in
the Person of Jesus Christ.
It is not difficult to transport ourselves into the
scene of the interview between the Ethiopian eunuch
1 In revising this Lecture for publication I found that some parts of
the argument had been more fully set forth in a Sermon preached
before the University of Oxford. As the latter has not been published,
and the two Lectures treat, in some parts of them, of substantially the
same subject, I have thought it best to incorporate in this such portions
of my University Lecture as more fully expound the views which I
wished to present. At the same time, in now elaborating an argument
which had been indicated in a former Lecture, it -was impossible to avoid
occasional repetition of what had been previously stated.
tBOT.iv 1 .
QUESTION OF THE EUNUCH. lf)3
and the Evangelist Philip. We have only to follow
the most southern of the three anciently, perhaps,
only two roads, which led from Jerusalem to Gaza.
Beyond Eleutheropolis it passed through the ' desert,'
that is, through a tract, now and, as there is
reason to believe, in New Testament times unin-
habited. Close by the road, in Wady el-Hasy, is
a sheet of water, possibly the place of the eunuch's
baptism. It can scarcely surprise us that this stranger,
who had just been to Jerusalem to worship, should
on this lonely road have busied himself with the Old
Testament, nor yet that, in his peculiar circumstances
and near the boundary of the Land of Promise, he
should in preference have turned to its prophecies,
especially to that section in the roll of Isaiah where
those boundaries were enlarged till they became wide
as the world itself. Nor does it seem strange that, as
in thought he climbed the sacred height and stood
before the great central Figure of that mysterious
Sufferer, he could not recognise His features. To this
day has Israel failed to see in that Face marred more
than any man's its Messiah-King, the Crown of its
glory only seen in it the impress of its own troubled
history. And how could this stranger know it, who
had but lately stood wondering in that gorgeous
Temple, thronged by thousands of worshippers, and
looked, as the crowd of white-robed priests ministered
at the great altar of burnt-offering, and beyond it,
104 PROPHECY AOT) HISTORY. EBOT. It.
from out the inner Sanctuary, floated the cloud of
incense and shone the light 'of the ever-burning
golden candlestick, while the voice of Levite-psahns
filled the house with solemn melody. To lift one's
eyes from that scene to the sin-burdened Sufferer, as to
the ideal of it all Who, in His stripes, bore the sin
of the world, and so was the crowned Servant of
Jehovah implied a contrast which only Divinely-
guided history could resolve, and only God-taught
faith comprehend.
We do not wonder then at his question : Of whom
does the prophet speak ? It is the same which in its
ultimate idea, as the mystery of suffering, has engaged
all thinking. Yery really, it is the same which these
eighteen centuries and more has divided us; which
the Jew has sought to answer as he stood before the
prophetic picture of Isaiah, and the Christian as he
gazed on the crucified Christ. How perplexing it has
proved to the Synagogue appears not only from the
widely-divergent rather absolutely contradictory
interpretations which the most learned of the Eabbis
have given to this prophecy, but even from their own
admissions after they had attempted to solve its
mystery. The philosophic Ibn Ezra speaks of this
Parashah as one ' extremely difficult.' Isaac b. Elijah
Cohen says : ' I have never in my life seen or heard
of the exposition of a clear or fluent commentator,
in which my own judgment and that of others who
EEC*. IT. THE ELFTlr-THIllD CHAPTEK OP ISAIAH. 105
have pondered on the same subject might completely
acquiesce.'
And, to make only one other quotation from
Dr. Pusey's Preface to the Catena of Jewish Inter-
pretations on the 53rd of Isaiah, Ibn Amram says :
' There is no little difficulty in giving a sense to those
most obscure words of Isaiah in the present ; they
manifestly need a prophetic spirit.' That, from the
Jewish standpoint, such should be the case, every un-
prejudiced student will readily understand. And we
may further remark, that the latest attempt of a cer-
tain school of critics to add to the Christian and the
Jewish a third interpretation, in some sense more
Jewish than that of the Jews, has only resulted in
another, and yet more manifest, exegetical impossi-
bility. But amidst these perplexities there seems at
least one clear guiding light. The prophecy speaks
not only of suffering, but of conquering, 'and of
conquering by suffering. Now suffering is human ;
conquering is divine : but to conquer by suffering is
theanthropic.
But amidst all our diversity there is, we are
thankful to know, substantial agreement on one and,
as it might seem, the most important point. There is
no fundamental divergence between Jew and Chris-
tian as regards the translation of this chapter. In this
it differs from certain other passages designated as
Messianic, such as Genesis xlix. 10, Psalm ii. 12, or the
106 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. tsar, it.
proper meaning of the word almah in Isaiah vii. 14
which are respectively rendered in the Authorised
Version by, * Until Shiloh come ;' l Kiss the Son lest he
be angry ;' and ' Behold, a Virgin shall conceive and
bear a Son.' We would go a step further. Even as
regards the so-called Messianic prophecies generally,
there is, with few exceptions, a similar general agree-
ment as to the translation of the words ; or at least
generally little that is fundamental is involved in the
divergences. In other words, if it were only a ques-
tion of the meaning of the original, we might hope
soon to be at one. More especially is this the case
as regards the climax of all Messianic predictions, the
53rd chapter of Isaiah. In the words of Dr. Pusey:
' Next to nothing turns upon renderings of the
Hebrew. The objections raised by Jewish contro-
versialists ... in only four, or at most five words,
turn on the language.' And the matter seems, at first
sight, the more perplexing that there is substantial
agreement, not only as regards the wording, but also
the main contents of this prophecy. All admit that
the subject of this prophecy is portrayed as lowly in
His beginnings ; suffering sorrow, contempt, and death ;
that He would be accounted a transgressor, yet that
His sufferings were vicarious, those of the just for the
unjust, and this by God's appointment ; that in meek
silence and willing submissiveness He would accept
His doom ; that His soul was an offering for sin which
LEOI. it. REASON OF FUNDAMENTAL DIFFERENCES. 107
God accepted ; that He made many righteous ; that He
intercedes for trangressors ; that He is highly exalted
in proportion to His humiliation ; and that kings
would submit to Him, and His reign abide. To quote
once more the language of Dr. Pusey : ' The question
is not, " What is the picture?" in this all are agreed;
but, " Whose image or likeness does it bear ? " ' To
put it otherwise : the question is not as to the meaning
of the passages, but as to their application. 'Of
whom speaketh the prophet this ? ' of himself? of
his contemporaries, or some part of them? or of some
other One, who sums up in Himself the leading features
of all, and yet passes beyond them, just as all fruit
in the reality of its fulfilment passes beyond its visible
germ-promise, unfolding all its indicated possibilities.
How then are we to account for the differences
existing between us ? The truth is, we start, indeed,
from the same premisses, but into widely different
directions. We all start not without preconceived
opinions, as some would call them or guiding prin-
ciples, as I would designate them. The Jew starts
with his preconceived opinions as to what must or
must not be in accordance with his general views of
the teaching of the Old Testament. The Christian
starts with the historical facts concerning Christ and
Christianity in his mind. To the one this, to the other
that, is the guiding principle in the application of
what both have agreed to be the meaning of the.
108 EROPHEOY AND HISTORY.
words and the contents of a prophecy. And it can-
not well be otherwise. The honest inquirer can only
seek to know which of the two directions is the
right one. This question, indeed, is of widest appli-
cation. It covers the entire range of prophecy, and
is decisive in the controversy between the Synagogue
and the Church, on which, we would here remind
ourselves, depend far graver issues than merely in-
tellectual victory. But in answering this question as
to the guiding principle in the interpretation of pro-
phecy, it is evident that we must get behind individual
prophecies consider them not merely as isolated,
but as a whole, trying to ascertain whether or not
the Old Testament, as a whole, is prophetic of the
Messiah, and whether or not the historical Christ
and Christianity present the real fulfilment of that
prophecy.
It is not, I hope, too fine a distinction to make
between prophecy as referring to Christ, and pro-
phecy as fulfilled in Christ. The two mark different
standpoints in our view of prophecy, the one being
the prospective or speculative, the other the retro-
spective or historic view of it. But it seems to me
that Christian divines have not only quitted their
high vantage-ground of historical fact, but acted
contrary, alike to sound reasoning and the example
of the New Testament, in disputing whether or not
certain individual prophecies referred to Christ,
. IV. THE FULFILMENT OF PROPHECY. 109
instead of first presenting their actual historical ful-
filment in Trim. Had ibhey begun with this, they
would have exhibited the fundamental principle
which underlies all prophecy, and shown the true
sense in which these predictions must refer to Christ.
It is altogether a narrow principle which has
been applied to the study of prophecy, and which
too often results in disputes about words instead of
presenting the grand and indubitable facts of fulfil-
ment. There are persons who argue very strangely
in regard to this matter. It is sometimes supposed
that those who uttered a prophecy, perhaps even
those who heard it, must have understood its full
meaning, its complete Messianic bearing, or at least
have had full conception of the personal Messiah as
now in the light of fulfilment we know Him. 1 And
when it is shown that this could not have been the
case, it is forthwith rashly concluded that the Mes-
sianic application for which we contend is erroneous.
But it is a kind of Jewish literalism which lies at the
basis of this erroneous view of prophecy, a narrow
and utterly unspiritual view of it, a mechanical view
also, which treats fulfilment in its relation to pro-
phecy as if it were a clock made to strike the
precise quarters of the hour. But it is not so. The
1 Thus G. Baur in his very thoughtful Geschichte d. Messianischen
Weissagungen a hook which contains the substance of much that a very
large proportion of a certain class of critics have since had to say only in
more moderate language than theirs.
110" EROfflECY AND HIStfOBt. tEcr. tfr.
fulfilment is always both wider and more spiritual
than the prediction. It contains it and much more,
and it can only be properly understood when viewed
in its relation to prophecy as a whole. For it is
evident that, if we were to maintain that those who
uttered or who heard these predictions had possessed
the same knowledge of them as we in the light of
their fulfilment, these things would follow: First.
Prophecy would have superseded historical develop-
ment, which is the rational order, and God's order.
Secondly. In place of this order we would introduce
a mechanical and external view of God's revelation,
similar to that which in theology has led to the fatal
notion of a mechanical inspiration, and which in
natural science (viewed from the theological stand-
point) scouts the idea of development, and regards
all as absolutely finished from the beginning views
which have been the bane of much that otherwise
would have been sound in Natural Theology and
Apologetics, and which have proved destructive to
the old supernaturalism, involving in its fall much
that was true, and which has now to be digged
out of the ruins and built up anew. Thirdly. It
would eliminate from God's revelation the moral
and spiritual element that of teaching on His part,
and of faith and advancement on ours. Fourthly.
It would make successive prophecies needless, since
all has been already from the first clearly and fully
taxa. iv. CHARACTER OF PROPHECY. Ill
understood. Lastly. Such a view seems in direct
contradiction to the principle expressly laid down in
1 Pet. i. 10, 11, as applicable to prophecy.
On the other hand, the principle that prophecy
can only be fully understood from the standpoint of
fulfilment, seems not only in accordance with all that
one would expect since otherwise prophecy would
have been simply foretold history, without present
application and teaching but it must be evident that,
if such had been the object in view, it would have been
more natural, and, as it would seem, have secured
the purpose more fully, to have told it out plainly,
without the use of figure or metaphor, in language
that could not have been misunderstood or mis-
t
interpreted. And so it almost seems as if some
persons would fain have it, and that not only in
regard to prophecy, but they complain that the ISTew
Testament should have told them everything plainly,
giving every particular, even to the minutest direc-
tion as to the modes of our organisation, the order
of our services, and the details of our Church life.
But it is not so, and it never can be so, if, as we
believe, our religion is of God. What in these
demands is true has been granted, though not in
the way in which it was expected. The history of
the Church has taught us much of that which the
New Testament contains, and the enlightened Chris-
tian consciousness has learned, as through bilingual
112 PEOPHEOY AKb fllSTOKTT. LEOT. it,
inscriptions, to read the characters and the language
in which much of the past was written. History
has unfolded much that the New Testament had in-
folded, and under the ever-present guidance of the
Holy Spirit we have learned to understand it. NOT
does the objection hold good, that in such case they
of old must in measure have been ignorant of the
truth. In their measure they were not ignorant
of it, but their measure is not ours. We believe
in development and progress, rightly understood.
Divine truth and revelation are, indeed, always the
same : one, full, and final ; and nothing can be added
thereto. But with the development of our wants
and with our progress its meaning unfolds, and it
receives ever new appli cations. We understand
things more fully if you like, differently from our
fathers, not because they are different, but because
we are different, because questions have arisen to us
which had not come to them, because mental and
moral wants press upon us which had not presented
themselves to them. And what is this but to assert
the constant teaching of Grod ? We bring not a new
truth, but unfold the old ; and from its adaptation,
ever fresh and new to all times, to all men, to all
wants, we gather fresh and living evidence of its
Divine origin.
It is in this manner that prophecy in its appli-
cation to Christ should be studied : first, the living
. it.
tHE INTERPRETATION OF fROPHECY. 113
Person, tlien His portraiture ; first, the fulfilment,
then the prophetic reference ; first, the historical,
then the exegetical argument. These remarks are
not intended to deprecate the application of indi-
vidual prophecies to Christ ; only to correct a one-
sided and mechanical literalism that exhausts itself
in fruitless verbal controversies in which it is not
unfrequently worsted, and to give to our views the
right and, as we believe, the spiritual direction. For,
even an exegetical victory would not decide that
inward direction of heart and life which makes the
Christian. We fully and gladly add that even in
strict exegesis many special predictions can be only
Messianically interpreted. But we believe still more
that the Old Testament as a whole is Messianic, and
full of Christ ; and we wish this to be first properly
apprehended, that so from this point of view the
Messianic prophecies may be studied in detail. Then
only shall we understand their real purport and
meaning, and perceive, without word-cavilling, that
they must refer to the Messiah.
And in this, as in all other things, we take our
best guidance from the New Testament. When we
ask ourselves whence those quiet God-fearing persons
a Simeon, Anna, Zacharias, Elisabeth, a Joseph,
and, with reverence be it added, the Virgin-Mother
took their direction before the manifestation of
Christ ; and, during its course, His disciples and fol-
I
114 PEOPHECY AND HISTORY.
lowers, we unhesitatingly answer, from the Old Tes-
tament. But from the Old Testament as a whole ;
not, in the first place, from individual predictions,
since in the nature of things these could only be ful-
filled in the gradual development of His history.
Nay, even when a prediction was actually fulfilled, as
that of Zechariah in Christ's entry into Jerusalem,
the reference to it is followed by this significant
explanation of St. John (xii. 16) : ' These things
understood not His disciples at the first : but when
Jesus was glorified, then remembered they that these
things were written of Him, and that they had done
these things unto Him.' And this also explains how
that which to our minds constitutes the central point
in all Messianic predictions the sufferings of the
Christ so far from being prominent in the minds of
His disciples, was ever that which they could not
understand. It was only after His Eesurrection, on
that blessed evening-walk to Emmaus, that He could
say to those two simple-hearted disciples, who were so
sad at the things which had come to pass : ' Oh fools
and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets
have spoken ! Ought not Christ to have suffered these
things and to enter into His glory? And beginning
at Moses and all the Prophets, He expounded unto
them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Him-
self.' And it was again after that that He more fully
taught His Apostles : ' These are the words which I
tixrt. iv. THE ITOETLMEiifT o PROPHECY.
have spoken unto you, while I was yet with you, that
all things must be fulfilled which were written in the
Law of Moses and in the Prophets, and in the Psalms
concerning Me. Then opened He their understanding,
that they might understand the Scriptures.' They
could not recognise any one single feature, however
salient, till the whole Figure stood before them
bathed in the heavenly light. Then could each one
of them -be recognised as it had been portrayed by
the prophets. They learned fulfilled prophecies in
the light of fulfilled prophecy. And so shall we
also best learn it.
Two things here strike the observant reader of
the New Testament : first, the sparseness of prophetic
quotations in the Gospels ; and, secondly, their pecu-
liarity. So far as I remember, only the one prophecy
concerning His birth at Bethlehem was ever adduced
to guide men to the Christ. And this predicti.on,
itself a locus classicus universally accepted, was logi-
cally necessary. But even so, it had nothing special
to direct to Jesus as the Christ. In all His teach-
ing, except when in the Synagogue of Nazareth, He
pointed to His message of the kingdom as fulfilling
the prophecy of Isaiah, He did not base His Messianic
claims on any special prophecies. He ever based
them on what He was, on what He said, on what He
did ; on the message of love from the Father which
stood incarnate before them in His Person, on the
12
116 PROPHECY AOT> HISTORY. ran. iv,
opening of the kingdom of heaven to all believers, on
the forgiveness, the peace, and the healing to body
and soul, which He brought. That was the fulfilment
of Old Testament prophecy ; this the kingdom for
which all had been preparing, and which all had
announced. And because He was the fulfilment of
all, therefore was He the Messiah promised: the
desire of all nations, towards which their conscious
and unconscious longings had tended, and the glory
of His people Israel, the crowning glory of all
their spiritual teaching. Because He was the fiilfil-
ment of the Old Testament ideal, the deeper reality
of its history and institutions, therefore did all the
prophecies refer to Him. And when that stood fully
out, then could His Apostles (as in their preaching in
the Book of Acts) point to the prophecies as referring
to Him. This is the zmfolding in the New, of what
was mfolded in the Old Testament.
Secondly, the observant reader of the New Tes-
tament will be struck by the peculiarity of the Old
Testament quotations in the Gospels. As regards
their form they are mostly neither exactly from the
original Hebrew nor from the Septuagint. This in
accordance with universal custom. For popular use
the Scriptures were no longer quoted in the Hebrew,
which was not spoken, nor from the LXX, which was
under Eabbinic ban, but targumed, rendered into the
vernacular ; the principle being very strongly ex-
EECT. iv. QUOTATIONS IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. 117
pressed that, in so doing, it was not the letter, but
the meaning of the passage which was to be given. 1
But as regards the substance of these quotations,
we feel as if mostly those passages had been ad-
duced which we would least have expected to be
quoted. The reason of this lies in the well-known
fundamental principle of the Synagogue, that { all the
prophets only prophesied of the Messiah ' nay, that
all events in the history of Israel and all their insti-
tutions were prophetic, and pointed forward to a
fuller realisation in the Messiah. To whatever ex-
travagance of detail this may have been carried,
I have no hesitation in saying that the underlying
principle is not only tenable, but both sound and
true.
This may be the proper place for some remarks
on Prophecy in general, in the Biblical sense of the
term, and on the Prophets in the Old Testament
application of the designation.
1. Prophecy, in general perhaps I should have
said Prophetism may, in the Biblical sense of the
term, be denned as the reflection upon earth of the
Divine ideal in its relation to the course of human
affairs. According as the one or the other of these
is the primary element, it refers to the future, or
else to the present or the past. In the one case it
is mainly predictive, in the other mainly parenetic.
>Nidd.49a.
118 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. IECT. iv.
This from our human standpoint, where we view
things as future, present, or past not from that of
Divine reality where all is present.
In this general statement regarding prophecy,
nothing has been said as to the medium through
which this reflection of the Divine Light is to be
made upon earth whether institutions, events, or
persons and in the latter case, both through those
who are in harmony, and those who are out of har-
mony with the Divine : true or false prophets. In
point of fact, prophecy, or the reflection of the Divine
upon earth, may be, and really was, through each
and all of these media. And the more fully we con-
sider it, the more appropriate and even necessary will
it appear to us that such should have been the case.
For so will history which is not a fortuitous suc-
cession of events, but their orderly evolution from
certain well-defined causes towards a Divinely willed
end most properly attain its destined goal.
It may seem a bold statement, and yet, to me at
least, it seems logically clear, that our view of pro-
phecy implies only one premiss which is indeed a
postulate. It is that of the Living and the True God
But this is precisely what the Old Testament teaches
us concerning Jehovah. By the Living and the True
God, I mean, not an abstraction, but a Person, a
Moral Being ; the Creator and Owner of all ; the
Centre of all, with Whom all is in living connection ;
IECT. iv. REVELATION AND PROPHECY. 119
or, in the words of St. Paul's quotation, He c in Whom
we live and move and have our being.' I am aware
that if the view of prophecy here indicated can be
historically established, it would, on the other hand,
lead by induction to historic evidence of such a God.
But I leave this for the present aside, and put my
argument, or rather my mode of viewing it, on this
wise. The presence of a Living and True God in
living connection with His creatures, seems to imply,
as a necessary corollary, a Divine ideal in reference
to the course of human events. From this again it
would seem to follow, that there is at least strong
presumption in favour of a Eevelation, which is the
communication to men of the Divine ideal. And
Eevelation and miracles are only different aspects of
such Divine communication. But there can at least
be no question that, if there be a Divine ideal with
reference to the course of human events, that ideal
must in the end, and as the goal of history, become
the real ; and, according to Holy Scripture, which in
this respect also answers to our former definition of
Revelation, this is and will be the Kingdom of God,
when the Divine ideal in reference to man shall have
become the real. And so it. is that all Scripture is
prophetic ; that all prophecy has its ultimate fulfil-
ment in the Kingdom of God ; and that all prophecy
points to it, or is Messianic in its character.
Wide-reaching as these statements are in their
120 PKOPHECY AND HISTOEY. EBOT. iv,
sequences, they must appear reasonable, at least to
every Theist, and they are in accordance with
what Holy Scripture sets forth as its object and
contents.
2. From these more abstract considerations we
turn, somewhat abruptly, to the concrete manner in
which Prophetisni is presented in the Old Testament.
From one point of view, three classes are there desig-
nated as Prophets : Those who were avowedly the
prophets of other gods, as of Baal or Ashtaroth ;
those who, while professedly the prophets of Jehovah
(or Jahveh), were not really such some conscious,
some apparently not conscious of imposture; and,
Lastly, those who were really * sent ' by Jehovah. As
all these, however widely differing in character,
bear the same name of * prophets,' it follows not, as
some would have it, that the Old Testament considers
them all as equally prophets (which would be the
heathen view of it), but that the title { prophet ' must
be regarded as simply a generic designation, which
t
implied no judgment either as to the character or the
claims of those who bore it. More light comes to us
from the root-meaning of the terms by which these
' prophets ' are designated in the Hebrew. To a cer-
tain extent they show us what ideas originally attached
to the functions of a prophet, although we should
always keep in view how easily and quickly a word
moves away from its original meaning to its common
. iv.
HEBREW TERMS FOB 'PROPHET.' 121
application. Leaving aside such descriptive appella-
tions as 'man of God,' 'messenger of God,' or the like,
which afford no help towards the definition of the
term ' prophet,' there are three words by which that
office is chiefly described in the Hebrew, Nabhi, Roeh,
and Chozeh. The etymology and meaning of the word
Nabhi have been in dispute. According to some, it
means primarily a spokesman ; according to the major-
ity of critics, it is derived from the verb nabha, which
means to ' well forth' or ' bubble up.' Although the
latter seems the more correct, yet there is practically
little difference between the two interpretations. The
idea which we necessarily attach to this 'bubbling
up,' or ' welling forth,' is, that the prophet was so
filled with Divine inspiration that it 'bubbles up*
out of his speech, that he ' wells it forth ; ' x in which
sense the New Testament also speaks of believers, in
virtue of their reception of the Holy Spirit, as those
out of whom ' flow rivers of li ving water/ 2 It will
be perceived that this description of the prophet as
'welling forth' the Divine truly or falsely is so
general as to be universally applicable ; and, in-
deed, the term seems kindred to those used by other
nations of antiquity.
Thus viewed, the Prophet is the medium of sup-
1 The use of the word in 1 Ohron. xxv. 1-8 deserves special con-
sideration as implying a wider and more general application.
8 St. John vii. 38. "
122 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. laser. -iv.
posed or real Divine communication from whatever
Deity it be and the 'weller-forth' is also 'the spokes-
man.' It is in this sense that, when Moses was sent to
bear the Divine communication to Pharaoh, Aaron
was promised to him as his Nabhi his weller-forth,
spokesman, or medium of communication. 1 This may
also help us to understand the meaning of an institu-
tion and of a designation in the Old Testament which
is of the deepest interest : that of ' schools of the pro-
phets ' and 'the sons of the prophets. 3 I would suggest
that ' the sons of the prophets ' stood related to the
prophets as the prophets themselves to the Divine. 2
They were the medium of prophetic communication,
as the prophets were the medium of Divine com-
munication. And the analogy holds true in every
particular. As the prophet must absolutely submit
himself to God, and be always ready to act only as the
medium of Divine communication, so must the ' son
of the prophet ' be ready to carry out the behests of
the prophet, and be the medium of his communi-
cation, whether by word or deed. As a prophet
might be divinely employed temporarily, occasionally,
or permanently, so the sons of the prophets by the
prophets. God might in a moment raise up and
qualify suitable men to be His prophets or means of
.... * Ex. vii. 1 ; comp. iv. 16.
3 1 ain here only treating of one aspect of the question; but, as it
seems to me, the most important.
J33CT. iv. PROPHETS AND ( SONS OF THE PROPHETS.' 128
communication, since only inspiration was required
for this. But the prophets could not exercise such in-
fluence in regard to their ' sons.' Accordingly, special
institutions, ' the schools of the prophets,' were re-
quired for their training and preparation. Besides
this primary object, these establishments would serve
important spiritual and religious purposes in the land,
alike as regarded their testimony to Prophetism, their
cultivation of the Divine, their moral discipline,
readiness of absolute God-consecration and implicit
submission to Him, and general religious influence
on the people. But the analogy between prophets
and sons of the prophets went even farther than
we have indicated. For the moral qualifications for
the two offices, however fundamentally differing, were
in one respect the same. For both offices the one
condition needful was absolute obedience ; that is,
viewed subjectively, passiveness ; viewed objectively,
faithfulness. Alike the prophet and the son of the
prophet must, in the discharge of his commission,
have absolutely no will or mind of his own, that so
he may be faithful to Him "Whose medium of com-
munication he is. Hence perhaps sometimes pur-
posely, to preach this to an unbelieving generation
the strange symbolisms occasionally connected with
the prophetic office, and, on the other hand, the
severe and, as it might otherwise seem, excessive
punishments with which the smallest deviation from
124 PKOPHRCY AND HISTORY. IWJT. TV.
the exact terms of the commission was visited. For,
not only each special prophetic mission, but the very
meaning and basis of the prophetic office, depended
on the exact transmission of the communication.
But we remember that the designation Ndblii is
not the only one by which the prophetic functions
are described in the Old Testament. Of the two
other terms employed, Eoeh describes the prophet as
a seer, while Chozeh presents him rather as one who
gazes. Although etymological distinctions are apt
to run into each other, and in the present instance
have actually done so, I would venture to suggest
that, originally, the Eoeh or seer may have been the
prophet as seeing that which then existed, although
unseen by ordinary men ; while the Chozeh or gazer
would represent the prophet as, in rapt vision, gazing
on the yet future. In any case, the term Nabhi would
not only be the more general and generic designation,
but indicate a higher standpoint, as implying that
the prophet acted as the medium of Divine communi-
cation.
Very interesting and instructive is the progres-
sion from the one to the other designation as marked
in 1 Samuel ix. 9. Erom this it appears that he who
in the time of the writer was called Nabhi had pre-
viously been designated as Roeh or seer. A rash
inference has been drawn from the circumstance that
nevertheless the term Nabhi appears in the Pentateuch
MOT. IT. PROPHET AND SEEtt. 125
as applied, not only to Aaron in regard to Moses, 1
but to Abraham in regard to God, 2 and that, indeed,
it repeatedly occurs in the Books of Numbers and
Deuteronomy. 3 But this does not necessarily imply
that the Pentateuch was written after the term Nabhi
had taken the place of Roeh, for, in point of fact, it
never really did take that place ; and the writer of
1 Samuel does not assert that the term Nabhi had
.
previously been unknown, but that before the time
of Samuel the designation of the prophet in common
use had been that of Roeh or seer. This seems to us
to mark a lower religious standpoint, when the pro-
phet was chiefly regarded as a seer of what was
unseen by others. Thus, it would be in character
with the period of spiritual decay from the time of
Joshua to that of Samuel. But with the ministry of
Samuel there was a return to the original idea of
the prophet as the medium of Divine communication,
when the functions of Roeh or Chozeh were either
subsidiary, or only special aspects of the prophetic
office.
2. Leaving aside, for the present, the question of
the means indicated in the Old Testament for dis-
tinguishing the true prophet of Jehovah from the
pretended, or from prophets of Baal, it will be seen
1 Ex. vii. 1. * Gen. xx. 7.
8 Num. xi. 29; xii. 6; Deut. xiii. 1, 3, 6; xviii. 15, 18, 20, 22 3
xxxiv. 10.
126 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. MOT. "if,*
tli at the generic term Nabhi might be equally applied
to these three classes. They were all Nebhiim, or
organs of communication, of what professed to be the
Divine. Further, this definition of the Nabhi will help
us to understand the real functions of the prophetic
office. We no longer regard the prophet as merely
the foreteller of future events, nor yet identify
prophecy with prediction. This would introduce a
heathen and mantic element, contrary to the whole
spirit of the Old Testament, and foreign to it also in
this, that it withdraws from its most important in-
stitutions the moral and spiritual, which is the pri-
mary principle of the Old Testament. Nor do we, on
the other hand, so accentuate the recorded facts
concerning the work of the prophets as to regard
them merely as those who announced to their age
the Mind and Will of Jahveh taught, admonished,
warned (the parenetic element). This would lead up
to the gradual effacement of the distinctive idea of
Prophetisni. No, nor yet do we see in it a combi-
nation of the two elements, the predictive and the
parenetic, but a welding of them into one. The pro-
phet is the medium of Divine communication. When
he preaches he does not merely refer to the present ;
nor yet when he foretells does he refer exclusively
to the future. He occupies, with reverence be it
said, in a sense, the Divine standpoint, where there
is neither past, present, nor future.
iv. THE CHARACTEK OF PBOPEECY. 127
And here we must come back upon explanations
in a former Lecture. The Prophet, as preacher,
views the present in the light of the future ; as fore-
teller, the future in the light of the present. He
points out present sin, duty, danger, or need, but all
under the strong light of the Divine future. He
speaks of the present in the name of God, and by His
direct commission ; of a present, however, which, in
the Divine view, is evolving into a future, as the
blossom is opening into the fruit. And when he fore-
tells the future, he sees it in the light of the present ;
the present lends its colours, scenery, the very historic
basis for the picture.
This, as we have seen, will help to explain alike
the substance and the form of the prophetic message.
To the prophetic vision the present is ever enlarging,
widening, extending. These hills are growing, the
valley is spreading, the light is gilding the mountain
tops. And presently the hills are clothed with green,
the valleys peopled with voices ; the present is merging
into the future, although exhibited in the form of the
present. The prophet is speaking of Moab, Ammon,
Tyre, Assyria ; and these are gradually growing into
the shapes of future foes, or future similar relations.
And in the midst of such references here and there
appears what applies exclusively to that Messianic
Kingdom which is the goal and final meaning of all,
and of all prophecy. It is an entire misunderstand-
128 * PROPHECY AND HISTORY. MOT. m
ing to regard such prophecies as not applying to
the Messianic future, because they occur in the
midst of references to contemporary events. As
the rapt prophet gazes upon those hills and valleys
around him, they seem to grow into gigantic moun-
tains and wide tracts, watered by many a river
and peopled with many and strange forms, while
here and there the golden light lies on some
special height, whence its rays slope down into
valleys and glens ; or else, the brightness shines out
in contrasted glory against dark forest, or shadowy
outline in the background. And the Prophet could
not have spoken otherwise than in the forms of
the present. For, had he spoken in language, and
introduced scenery entirely of the future, not only
would his own individuality have been entirely
effaced, but he would have been wholly unintelligible
to his contemporaries, or, to use the language of
St. Paul, he would have been hke those who spoke
always in an unknown tongue.
To make ourselves more clear on these points,
let us try to transport ourselves into the times and
circumstances of the prophets. Assume that the
problem were to announce and describe the Messianic
Kingdom to the men of that generation, in a manner
applicable and intelligible to them, and also pro-
gressively applicable to all succeeding generations,
up to the fulfilment in the time of Christ, and beyond
ir. PROPHECY TO ALL GENERATIONS. . 121)
it, to all ages and to the furthest development of
civilisation. The prophet must speak prophetically
yet intelligibly to his own contemporaries. But, on
the other hand, he must also speak intelligibly, yet
prophetically to the men of every future generation
even to us. We can readily understand how in such
case many traits and details cannot have been fully
understood by the prophets themselves. But we are
prepared to affirm that all these conditions are best
fulfilled in the prophecies of the Old Testament, and
that, if the problem be to announce the Messianic
Kingdom in a manner consistent with the dogmatic
standpoint then reached, the then cycle of ideas and
historical actualities and possibilities, and yet suitable
also to all generations, it could not have been better
or equally well done in any other manner than that
actually before us in the Old Testament. As a matter
of fact, the present generation, and, as a matter of
history, all past generations admittedly the whole
Jewish Church and the whole Christian Church
have read in these prophecies the Messianic future.
and yet every successive generation has understood
them, more or less clearly, and in a sense newly. If
I might venture on an illustration : the reading of
prophecy seems like gazing through a telescope,
which is successively drawn out in such manner as
to adapt the focus to the varying vision.
And yet the telescope is the same to all gene-
130 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. LECT. iv.
rations. We do not propose the' clumsy device of
a twofold application of prophecy, to the present and
to the future, but, taking the prophetic standpoint,
we regard the present as containing in germ the
future, and the future as the child of the present, so
that it can be presented in the forms of the present ;
or, to revert to a statement in a previous Lecture, it
is not a progression, nor even a development, but an
unfolding of the present. Viewed in relation to the
Messianic Kingdom, it is one and the same thing,
which to the eye of the prophet now is, and ever
shall be. We might almost apply to prophetisin this
in the Epistle to the Hebrews : ' Jesus Christ, the
same yesterday, and to-day, and for ever/ Canaan is a
prophetic land, and Israel a prophetic people, of whom
God says to the world : ' Touch not Mine anointed,
and do My prophets no harm.' And their whole
history is prophetic. It is not merely one or another
special prediction that is Messianic : everything
every event and institution is prophetic and Messia-
nico-prophetic, and what we one-sidedly call special
predictions are only special points on which the
golden light rests, and from which it is reflected. And
it is in this sense that we understand and adopt the
fundamental principle of the Synagogue, repeated in
every variety of form, that every event in Israel's his-
tory, and every prophecy pointed forward to the Mes-
siah, and that every trait and fact of the past, whether
iv. PROPHECIES IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. If 1
of Mstory or miracle, would be re-enacted more
fully, nay, in complete fulness, in the times of the
Messiah.
We repeat, that this fundamental view of the Old
Testament prophecy, or rather of the prophetic cha-
racter of the Old Testament in contradistinction to
the theory of merely isolated predictions in single
verses or clauses, or even in isolated chapters, must
not be misunderstood as if it implied that there are
not absolute and definite predictions in the Old Testa-
ment. Unquestionably there are such, that .had no
basis in the then present as when a sign was .to
be given, or an immediate judgment or deliverance
enounced. But the principles which we have laid
down are most wide-reaching in their bearing. They
find their application also to what are called the /
typjjs of the Old Testament, which are predictions
by deed, as prophecies are predictions by word, and /
in the study of which the reference to the future
must be learned from their teaching in the then pre-
sent: their typical from their symbolical meaning.
And the same principles also apply to what of pro-
phecy we have in the New Testament. This bears
chiefly on these three points : the Second Coming of
Christ, the Antichrist, and the visions of the Apoca-
lypse. The subject is so interesting, that without
applying in detail the principles laid down in this
Lecture, we may be allowed at least to indicate
1S2 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. iEd. it;
their bearing on each of these three groups of pro-
phecy.
As regards the Second Coming of Christ, it will
scarcely be questioned that it was somehow connected
with statements, which we now see to have primarily
referred to the destruction of Jerusalem and the
Temple. Equally there can be no doubt, that the
men of Christ's time expected His Advent, and also
that every age since has done the same ; and, indeed,
was intended to do so. The application of our prin-
ciples seems to introduce harmony into all this. It
was the all-engrossing and all-influencing fact, to be
viewed through the telescope of prophecy. And the
destruction of Jerusalem and of the Temple was not
only a symbol, but in an initial sense the very coming
of Christ into His Kingdom. That coming of Christ
into His Kingdom, which had been denied in explicit
words, and negatived by public deed, when by wicked
hands they slew Him, was vindicated, and, so to speak,
publicly enacted when the Roman soldier threw the
torch into the Temple, and when afterwards Jeru-
salem was laid level with the dust. As regards the
men of that land and generation, it was the public
proclamation, the evidence, that the Christ Whom
ibhey had rejected had come into His Kingdom. By
the lurid light of those flames no other words could
4>e read than those on the Cross : ' This is the King
of the Jews.' I say, then, the burning of Jerusalem
tfioi.it. PROPHECIES IN TfllS NEW TESTAMENT.
was to that generation and whatever kindred events
successively came within the focus of the telescopic
vision of following generations, were to them, the
fulfilment of that prophecy, of which the final com-
pletion will be the Personal reappearance of Christ at
the end of the jEon.
Similar inferences come to us when we turn to the
prophecies concerning the Antichrist. In that gene-
ration the mystery of iniquity was already working.
Antichrist had already come, in those Gnostic here-
sies, defacements and displacements of Divine truth,
and in the political antagonism, which almost threat-
ened the extinction of the Church. And in every
generation does ' the mystery of iniquity ' work ; and
it worketh now nay, as the holy Apostle explains, it
shall work in the children of disobedience, and so
long and wherever there are such, till that which
now letteth is taken away, and the dammed -up waters
rush into those ready channels, from which they had
so long been held, and so Antichrist be fully revealed.
Or, lastly, as regards the prophetic visions of the
Apocalypse, it is not difficult to perceive that the
forms and imagery so to speak, the groundwork
are taken from the then present: either from the
Temple and its services, or from current Apocalyptic
imagery, or else from the political history of the
time, from JSTero, and the events then occurring. But
because critics recognise, for example, Nero and that
134 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. SECT, iv.
period, it would surely be a very rash conclusion
that these visions are so jejune as to present merely
an Apocalyptic description of that time.
To sum up in practical conclusions what has been
stated in this Lecture. It is in the light of the wider
view of fulfilled prophecy which, as a whole and in
all its parts, refers to the Kingdom of God upon earth,
that we must study individual predictions. They
pass far beyond anything actual at the time of their
utterance to the underlying ideal. They are not
exaggerated Orientalisms for simple facts, but there
was one grand moving idea set forth with ever un-
folding clearness : the hope of a great Fatherhood of
God, of a great brotherhood of man, in which the
grand connecting link, alike with God and man, should
be the One Who embodied all that was ideally pos-
sible in man, and Who manifested all that could be
manifested of God ; Who united the highest point in the
human with the utmost condescension of the Divine
God and man ; Who brought God's reconciliation to
man, and by it reconciled man to God, combining in
Himself these two : the suffering of man and the con-
quering of God, and organically united them in con-
quering by suffering ; One Who, by so doing, made
possible, and introduced the Messianic Kingdom of
God, through the willing submission of man. Thus
the God-Man fully realised the theanthropic idea of
the whole Old Testament.
IBOT. rt* THE MESSIANIC GOAL, 135
As each event in His history kindled into light,
it shone, upon the individual prophecies, and made
them bright. And here let us -mark the inward con-
nection of these Messianic prophecies. If, putting
aside controversial criticism, we range them side by
side, and in their order, we perceive that which
modern philosophic science seeks, in all its depart-
ments : a grand unity. This unity cannot be accounted
for on the modern negative theory, which treats the
prophecies as disjecta membra^ having each sole appli-
cation to some one historical event of the past. Even
as regards the older view of prophetisrn, which I
have disclaimed, Kuenen himself has admitted at
least its attractiveness and grandeur. But further,
there is not only unity, but manifest progression.
The fundamental idea does not change, but it unfolds,
and applies itself under ever-changing and enlarging
circumstances, developing from particularism into
universalism ; from the more realistic preparatory
presentation to the spiritual which underlay it, and
to which it pointed ; from Hebrewism to the world-
Kingdom of God. And, lastly, this Messianic idea is
the moving spring of the Old Testament. It is also its
sole raison d'etre, viewed as a revelation. Otherwise
the Jewish people and their history could only have
an archaeological or a political interest for us. He-
brewism, if it had any Divine meaning, was the reli-
gion of the future, and Israel embodied for the world
PROPHECY Akb HISTORY. tEcr. iV.
the religious idea which, in its universal application,
is the Kingdom of God.
Or, else, if we discard this view of prophecy
altogether, then must we also surrender the Old Tes-
tament itself as of any Divine authority, or as other
than a form of ancient religion. For we can never be-
lieve that a narrow, national, and exclusive creed and
institutions could have been Divine in the strict sense,
or intended to be permanent ; for it is not possible
that the blood of bulls or of goats should take away
sins.' * But if you remove the Old Testament, then the
New Testament which is built on it must also fall.
For not only do Christ and His Apostles avowedly
stand upon Old Testament ground, but the Church
itself is built ' upon the foundation of the Apostles
and Prophets.' 2 This issue we can safely leave to the
arbitrament of time, or rather, as Christian believers,
in the hands of our God. Modifications of form and
of presentation may, and will come other perhaps
than we either expect or fear. But we have re-
ceived a kingdom that cannot be shaken 3 the
revelation of which, whether as prophecy under the
Old, or fulfilment under the New Testament, is, with
reverence be it said, worthy of God to have given,
worthy of Christ to have manifested, worthy of
humanity to be received and submitted to ; worthy
also, let us add, to be accepted by us in the rever-
ence of a humble, earnest, and personal faith.
1 Heb. x. 4. a Eph. ii. 20. Heb. xii. 28,
LECTURE V, 1
ON PBOPHETISM AND HEATHEN DIVINATION, THE MORAL ELE-
MENT IN OLD TESTAMENT PEOPHECY, AND THE BIBLICAL
CANONS FOB DISTINGUISHING THE TRUE FROM THE FALSE
PROPHET.
And He said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while
I was with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in
the Law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the Psalms, concerning
Me. Then opened He their understanding, that they might understand
the Scriptures. ST. LUKE xxiv. 44, 45.
WE may almost be pardoned the wish that St.
Luke had, at least in this instance, not so closely
1 An explanation may be allowed as to the difference as regards fulness
of treatment between some of these Lectures and others which follow.
In the more detailed Lectures I had to proceed upon lines that were
new, setting forth views derived from fresh study of the great subject.
These required therefore to be fully explained and vindicated. In the
other Lectures I travelled, perhaps necessarily, along lines which, more
or less, others had followed. Hence the treatment could be more concise.
And, indeed, a fuller discussion of all the subjects referred to would have
necessitated a treatment quite beyond the plan and scope of this course
of Lectures. For a similar reason I have made large use of the works
of the ablest writers on the various branches of the subject, such as
Oehler (Theol. d. A. Test. 2 vols.) ; Konig (d. Offenb. Begr. d. A. Test.),
and his last very able book,<Z. Hauptquellen d. Isr. Relig.-Gesch., without,
however, adopting his views on the Pentateuch ; Kiiper (Prophetenthum
d. A'. Bandes) ; Biehm (d. Mess. Weissaff.') ; Kohler (Prophet, d. Hebr.
u. d. Mantik d. alien Griecheri) ; and, besides others which will be
incidentally mentioned, Bredenkamp (Gesetz u. Propheteri). To the
latter I am specially indebted in tbis and the following Lecture. This
general acknowledgment must suffice instead of burdening the pages with
references.
138 PROPHECY AM) HISTORY . item, f*
adhered to his plan of narration, and told us in detail
to what special lines of prophetic thought Christ had
pointed the niinds which He opened, and what special
prophecies, dimly apprehended of old, He had now
illumined with the radiance of His risen glory. Yet
it is perhaps best for the Church that to all time only
these gigantic measurements should have been laid to
the Scriptures of the Old Testament : that they form
one organic whole, being bound together by the pro-
phetic element which is common to them all ; that
their prophecy is of the Christ, that He should suffer
and rise again, and that repentance and remission of
sins should be preached in His name to all nations
in other words, that they tell of His humiliation,
exaltation and reign ; of the story of sin, righteous-
ness, and judgment'; of man, Christ, and God ; or,
in more scientific language, that they contain the
anthropology, soteriology, and eschatology in short,
the history of the Kingdom of God.
But whatever prophetic Scriptures Christ may
have opened at that time, their Messianic interpreta-
tion would, to judge by the Old Testament quotations
in the Gospels, not have been according to the
strait-ness of the letter, which regarded a prophecy
as exhausted by one special event, but in the expan-
siveness of the spirit, which, starting from a definite
event as the terminus a quo of fulfilment, followed the
prophetic element in it through its unfolding to its
T. OBJECT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 139
finality in the Kingdom of God, which is the goal /
of. .all prophecy. As the words of our Lord imply,
the whole Old Testament is prophetic, not only in
its special predictions, but even in its history, from
the ' Out of Egypt I have called My Son,' to ' A
prophet like unto Me shall the Lord your God raise
up unto you.' Thus the Old Testament pointed be-
yond itself to the perfectness which it announced
and for which it prepared. That perfectness consists
in the removal of all the evil which sin has wrought,
in the restoration of man to God, and in the fulness
of blessings which flows from fellowship between
God and man. This is the Kingdom of God. To
announce it and to prepare for it, was the object of
the Old Testament. More especially was Prophetism
the moral and spiritual element in the Old Testa-
ment, which was intended to meet the people in their
successive stages of development, to point out to
them the lessons of the past, to explain the mean-
ing of the present, and so to prepare them for that
future which it announced. God's dealings with
Israel in the past were ever on the lips of the prophets.
In their hands the Law lost its deadness of the letter
and became instinct with a new life. Circumcision,
sacrifices, the priesthood, and all the other religious
institutions in Israel and what institution in Israel
was not religious ? were shown to have a spiritual
background, to point to spiritual realities, and to
140 tROPHEc? AND HISTORY.
have a spiritual counterpart in that blessed future
which the prophets were specially commissioned to
announce, that so through the lessons of the past and
the discipline of the present they might prepare men
for that future which was the end and goal of all.
To this moral element in prophetism as its inmost
characteristic the present Lecture will be devoted,
leaving another aspect of it for future consideration.
1. All prophecy has the moral and spiritual
element, I shall not say for its aim, but as its basis
and essential quality. The distinction seems important
in this, as in the case of miracles, especially those of
our Lord. An endeavour has sometimes been made
to vindicate for them what is called a moral object.
"But this would be to transfer our human modalities
to what is Divine. The Divine has no object out
side its own manifestation. The moral is its quality,
not its aim. And it is the moral and spiritual in
man, the remnant of the Divine in him, and that
which renders him capable of restoration, which,
consciously or unconsciously, stretches forth its hands
towards Grod, rises towards its spring, tends heaven-
wards. Consciously or unconsciously, it underlies
not only the idea of, but all the great institutions
that are common to all religions. It forms the fun-
damental idea of sacrifices, priesthood, prayers, pro-
phetism, and of that grand thought of a reign of
universal peace and happiness which, in one form or
EECT. Y. HEATHEN DIVINATION. 141
another, exists in all religions. In part these may be
regarded as the result and survival of a primeval
tradition ; and, in part, they are the outcome of the
deepest aspirations, and (why should I not say it ?) of
the true Divine instincts of the human spirit.
Even that which in some respects is farthest from,
and yet is also nearest to, prophecy heathen divi-
nation was not destitute of this moral element. 1 It
were a narrow and mistaken view, judging it by its
later development, to regard heathen divination as
merely imposture or delusion. In its fundamental
idea it represented deep consciousness of distance
from God ; a longing to know His will, to be guided
by it, and to have fellowship with Him ; and, finally,
a feeling that God was indeed near to man, that He
cared for him, and guided the events of his life.
These are also among the premisses on which the
Old Testament proceeded. Only, starting from the
same premisses, the Old Testament pointed in a
totally different direction, and accordingly reached the
opposite results from heathenism. Heathenism en-
deavoured to attain its desire by divination (mantic)?
which sought all either in nature or from man ; while
1 It is, therefore, only in a modified sense that I can adopt the saying
of Riickert, that all prophecy moves around these three words guilt,
judgment, redemption. It touches the human at these three points
hecause there the moral in man, consciously or unconsciously, stretches
forth its hands towards God.
2 Compare here generally the very thoughtful essay by Dr. K. Kohler,
d. Prophet, d. Hebr. u. d. Mantik d. alien Griechen.
142 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. LECT. v.
the Old Testament pointed for all to the living God.
Heathen divination was either by means external^
such as signs, auguries, the stars, conjuring the
dead ; or else by means internal, such as dreams,
visions, and the ecstatic state. But neither in the
one nor the other case did it seek its satisfaction
in spiritual fellowship with God. That element was
wholly wanting. The direct opposite of this is cha-
racteristic of the Old Testament and its prophecy.
Here everything is spiritual, comes from, and points
to God. Divine revelation meets the moral wants of
man, and directs him to God. This one thing appears
most clearly throughout the whole Old Testament:
that there is absolutely no power in any outward
things to produce prophecy, nor yet has the prophet
himself any power to produce it within himself by any
means of his own, but that in all cases it comes
straight from God, to whom, when,, how, and where
He pleases ; that a man becomes a prophet as God
gives him the message, and is such only and so long
as God continues to send it. On the other hand,
God did meet this deep want and longing of His
children by sending His prophets and putting His
Word into their mouths. Hence to receive or else to
resist them could not be matter of indifference, since
they were the direct ambassadors of God; but it
involved either obedience to Him, or else guilt.
And in the New Testament we have in this also
LECT. v. PROPHECY AND DIVINATION. 143
progressed to the finality of widest fulfilment. Of
old there were intermittent springs, now we have a
perennial fountain ; then the Holy Spirit fell on in-
dividuals at special times, now He dwells permanently
in all His people ; then there were prophets, now
we have One ever-living Prophet, an everlasting link
that binds us to God, One Who not only brings the
promises, but in Whom they are Yea and Amen. 1
Otherwise, also, the points of contact between
heathenism and revealed religion are most important.
They seem to start from the same point (as terminus a
quo), for the outgoings of the human spirit are ever
the same. But the road they take, and hence their
end (the terminus ad quern), are widely different,
for they are under very different guidance. These
common underlying ideas : a sense of guilt, longing
after the Divine, and belief in His connection with
our earth, equally express themselves in heathen and
in Jewish sacrifices, in the belief in the Golden Age,
and in the expectation of the Kingdom of God. A?
regards the latter, there is indeed this characteristic
difference, that, except as directed by the Jewish Sibyl,
the Golden Age is past, while in Eevelation it is the
goal towards which all God's manifestations and all
man's developments tend. But these institutions and
ideas were the outcome of the common consciousness,
1 Compare the article 'Prophet' by Kleinert in Riehm's Hand-
tyorterl), d. Sill. ATjt, vpl, U. pp. 1230, &c.
144 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. vsffs. v.
wants, aspirations, and expectations of all mankind,
and, as we believe, the result of a common original
tradition. But how differently they were developed,
and to what different goal they led in heathenism
and under the Old Testament, appears best when we
compare the final outcome of the two : in the one
case Jesus Christ, in the other the heathen world.
And, as regards this period of comparison, Hoffmann
has well expressed it, that what Caesar Augustus is for
the understanding of Eoman history, that Jesus Christ
is for that of the history of Israel. And the absolute
contrast of final results between the two developments
starting from the same point is due to this, that, as St.
Paul indicates, heathenism sought not the realisa-
tion of its wishes and wants by seeking it from God
they retained not God in their knowledge nor glori-
fied Him whereas revelation in the Old Testament
pointed to the living and true God, to simple faith
or receptiveness, and to submission to His Word and
Will, and then met that faith by a reality which bound
heaven to earth, made sacrifices a type of Christ,
prophecy a direct message from God, and the great
hope of the future a Kingdom of God on a ransomed
earth. And to go one step further : Even as regards
the knowledge of God, heathenism closely approxi-
mated to, yet remained at infinite distance from the
Old Testament. In its highest outcomings heathenism
reached to a unity, but it was the unity of a principle,
IEOT. v. HEATHENISM AND REVELATION. 145
or an abstraction an It, not He ; Fate, not Jehovah.
And even under the Old Testament the standpoint of
present knowledge was only that of Jehovah as the
God of all the earth and the Father of His people
Israel. It was prophecy which pointed beyond this
to the finality of all in the Christ, and to God as in
Him the God and Father of all His people. In a
world of which politically and religiously the one
great characteristic was the most rigid nationalism,
it stood alone in the moral grandeur of setting forth
the brotherhood of humanity, the sonship of adoption,
and the universal Fatherhood of God.
It is this moral element as leading up to God,
whereas heathenism led away from God, which is
characteristic of Eevelation and of the Old Testament
in every one of its institutions, and which also clearly
marks the difference between m antic and prophecy.
And this leads back to a question left unanswered in
the former Lecture. It will be remembered that, so
far from seeing anything incompatible a dilemma in
which we must make our choice between the pro-
phet as preacher to his times, or as the predicter of
future events, we perceived in these two aspects a
deeper unity. We are now prepared to go further,
and to recognise the necessity of this union of the
preacher and the predicter in the prophet. It is due
to the moral element in prophecy. Moreover, we
have here the means of understanding and applying
L
146 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. EBOT. T.
that test by wMch the Old Testament would have us
distinguish the true from the false prophet. Com-
monly two passages are quoted for this purpose.
But, as generally interpreted, it must be admitted
that the tests which they are supposed to supply
would be vague and unsatisfactory. For in Deut.
xiii. 1-5, we have only this characteristic of the false
prophet, that he leads the people away from Jehovah
and after other gods ; while in Deut. xviii. 9-22, the
canon is laid down, that if the thing predicted did not
come to pass, the prophet had not spoken from God,
but presumptuously and from himself. At first sight
it might seem as if both these tests were practically
worthless. For, this test that the false prophet led
away from God, might, from the standpoint of Anti-
Jehovahisni, seem to involve a petitio principii ; while,
as regards the test of a prediction by its fulfilment,
many years might have to elapse before it could be
applied, so that it would scarcely afford the means
for present discernment whether a prophet spoke
from the Lord or from himself.
But further consideration will correct this super-
ficial view. For, first, we mark in these two canons
a distinction between prophet and prophecy. The
latter might be either prediction in the narrowest
sense, or else prophecy in the wider sense. If pre-
diction in the narrower sense, it would, with rare
exceptions, which mark special high-points in pro-
LEOI. v. TEST OF THE TRUE PROPHET. 147
phetism, be a sign or an announcement of immediate
judgment or deliverance. In that case, the second
canon that of fulfilment or non-fulfilment 1 would
naturally apply. On the other hand, prophecy in
the wider sense would grow out of exhortation,
warning, or consolation, and, in the nature of it,
form part of, or be connected with, a whole group
of teaching. To it the first Canon about leading
away from God would, as we shall presently show,
be applicable as a moral test. And that the second
Canon in Deut. xviii. 22, chiefly referred to pre-
dictions of signs or judgments in the immediate
future, appears from this, that the words, ' if the
thing follow not, that is the thing which the Lord
hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it
presumptuously,' are immediately succeeded by these,
' Thou shalt not be afraid of him (or, of it).' Mani-
festly this addition would only have meaning if the
prediction referred to the immediate future.
But what of predictions in the more distant
future ? The test of these is, as already hinted, fur-
nished by the first canon (Deut. xiii. 1-5), which,
be it carefully marked, applies not to prophecy, but
to the prophet. Israel is emphatically warned, that
even if signs or wonders were wrought, the guidance
of a prophet was not to be followed if he led
away from the Living and True God. This canon
1 Deut. xviii. 9-22.
12
148 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. LEOT. v.
embodies most important and wide reaching prin-
ciples, distinctive of the Old Testament as compared
not only with heathenism, but we had almost said
with every other school of thought. It sets forth
the dominance of the moral and spiritual over every
other consideration. Power, even that of working
miracles, is but of inferior consideration : truth, right,
God the Divine, the spiritual are everything. This
is a height not only far beyond the ideas which we
commonly attach to the Old Testament, but, I ven-
ture to add, beyond the horizon of modern society,
which worships power as such, whatever its origin
or character may be. It is the spirit of that Pan-
Jehovahism which found utterance in the sublime
proclamation, unique in its meaning and bearing;
equally marvellous as coming from little Judasa and
down-trodden Israel, and as spoken at that age into
all the world; marvellous as a dogma, a prayer, a
call, and a prophecy ; marvellous also as a summary
of the Law and the Gospel, of Providence and Grace ;
of the past, the present, and the future : ' Jehovah
reigneth, let the earth be glad ; let the multitude of
isles be glad thereof.' 1 The words of the original,
in their rugged grandeur, seem like steps hewn in
the eternal ice, leading up to some Alpine height.
We need not quote this Psalm further, nor compare
it with the others in the Ps aim-range, among which
1 Ps. xcvii. 1.
. t. THE PEOCLAMA.TION OF GOB.
it rears its crest. But I venture to assert that none
but a Jehovahist, an Old Testament prophet, could
have so written, because none but he had the living
burning conviction that Jehovah He is God. Such
a history as that of the Old Testament produced
such belief; and such belief produced such expec-
tancy and utterance. -It produced a Moses, an Elijah,
a Daniel, and, even when crumbling into decay, had
its unnumbered. martyrs. Such utterances could not
have been those of uncircumcised heathen lips, nor
can we conceive them as the conviction or outcome
of heathen minds, whose highest speculations have
nothing of the true Divine life pulsating in them.
Eirst God, then everything else : be it man, king-
doms, demons, power, even Word as from God, or
signs and miracles ! This is the truth which Israel's
history had evolved, which Israel's institutions em-
bodied, which Israel's prophecies set forth, and by
which, in turn, according to Deuteronomy, Israel's
prophecy was to be tested. This then is the meaning
of the canon in Deut. xiii. : Try the prophet by his
confession of God. And similarly, we read it in the
New Testament : ' Try the spirits, whether they are of
God. . . . Every spirit which confesseth that Jesus
Christ is come in the flesh is of God, and every spirit
which confesseth not Jesus is not of God ; and this is
the spirit of the Antichrist.' l
1 St. John iv. 1, 2, 3.
150 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. iasac. v.
rJor was the application of this canon so difficult
as at first sight it may appear. In the case of a
prophet or a prophecy which, avowedly, led away
from God, there could be neither doubt nor question.
But even in the case of a prophet, professedly of
God, who brought a message as from Him, the mode
of decision is indicated. The Old Testament offers
a leading case, hitherto too much overlooked, which
furnishes, so to speak, a supplement and an explan-
ation of its canon. In the 28th chapter of Jeremiah,
a prophet is introduced, who prophesied differently
alike from his predecessors and from Jeremiah. It
is after the deportation to Babylon, and Hananiah
is within the sacred precincts of the Temple, in the
presence of priests and people, and in that of Jere-
miah himself, predicting the speedy restoration of
the holy vessels, of the king and the people, that
had been carried to Babylon. Apparently Jeremiah
does not charge him with being only and always a
false prophet. But the question arose, whether in
this special instance Hananiah, differing from all
others, acted as a true or was a false prophet? To
apply the canon in Deuteronomy : would it lead to,
or away from, following Jehovah, the Living and
True God ? The answer could not be difficult. It was
the Will of God, frequently expressed, that in the
then state of the people, their captivity, and the ces-
sation of the Temple-service, should not be of short
v. TEST OF A FALSE PKOPHET. 151
duration ; and that Judah should willingly submit to
God in this judgment, and to the instruments which
He had appointed to execute it. But the prediction
of Hananiah was in precisely the opposite direction
from this leading of God, and to have given cre-
dence to it would have led away from God. It is
this to which Jeremiah referred when, after expressing
as a patriot Israelite his intense desire that the pro-
phecy of Hananiah might prove to have been God-
sent, he added: 'Nevertheless hear this. . . . The
prophets that have been before me and before thee
of old, prophesied both against many countries, and
against many kingdoms, of war, and of evil, and of
pestilence.' This, in the then state of Israel and the
world, was evidently in accordance with the mind of
God ; there was moral evidence that it was of God.
' But,' continued the prophet : ' the prophet which
prophesieth of peace, when the word of that prophet
shall come to pass, then shall the prophet be known,
that Jehovah hath truly sent him ' (verses 6-9). In
other words, such prophesying, as leading away from
Jehovah, wanted the moral evidence. Let it be tried
by the test of fact.
Looking back upon it, I shall not call this the
vindication, but the manifestation and assertion of
the moral element in prophecy. This self-limitation
of prophetism, this submission of itself to the criterion
of God-obedience, not only contrasts with all divina-
162 PROPHECY AND filSTORY. iEOi. V.
tion, but is absolutely grand in its moral elevation,
and affords yet another evidence of its Divine cha-
racter. Once more we come, as we might have
expected, on New Testament lines. For it was this
moral element which our Lord presented to His ene-
mies as evidence of His own Prophetic Mission, when
He said : * If any man will do His will, he shall
know of the teaching, whether it be of God, or
whether I speak of Myself. He that speaketh of
himself seeketh his own glory ; but he that seeketh
His glory that sent him, the same is true. 1
Closely connected with this moral test, there is
another aspect of the moral element in prophetism,
another self- limitation and submission to God. In
heathenism, prediction was absolute ; in the Old
Testament, prophecy was never absolute, but always
subject to moral conditions. Commenting on the
33rd chapter of Ezekiel, which declared that the
prediction of death to the wicked and life to the
righteous were not absolute, but would be reversed
on their moral change, St. Jerome aptly observes:
' Nor does it follow that because a prophet foretold,
that which he foretold should come to pass ; for he
does not foretell in order that it might take place,
but lest it should take place (' nee statim sequitur ut
quia propheta prcedixit, veniat quod prcedixit. Non
enim prcedicit ut veniat, s.ed ne veniat'). It is in this
1 St. John vii. 17, 18.
v. CONDITiONALNESS OF PROPHECY. 153
sense that Holy Scripture, taking the human point of
view, so often speaks of God's repenting. All the
prophets who announced judgment also called to re-
pentance, and all such calls as so many in the pro-
phecies of Isaiah ; in Jer. iv. 3-5 ; Ezek. xviii. 30-32 ;
Joel ii. 12-14, and in other passages were accom-
panied by the promise that in case of obedience the
predicted -judgments would be averted. More espe-
cially do we here recall the words of Jeremiah (xviii.
7-10) : ' At what instant I shall speak concerning a
nation, and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, to
pull down, and to destroy it if that nation against
whom. I have pronounced turn from their evil, I will
repent of the evil that I thought to do unto them.
And at what instant I shall speak concerning a
nation, and concerning a kingdom, to build, and to
plant it: if it do evil in My sight that it obey not
My voice, then I will repent of the good wherewith
I said I would benefit them.'
It is not fate that presides over prophecy, nor
does fatality follow it. But there is a Living and
True God Who reigneth, and the moral is the rule
and characteristic of all prophecy. The Old Testa-
ment has settled, or rather anticipated, this great
theological problem of so many ages : the combina-
tion and compatibility of God's sovereignty and decree
with man's liberty and responsibility not by either
of our two clumsy devices or modes of cutting the
154 PKOPHECY AND HlSTOElT. iiscT. V,
knot that from above in what is called Predesti-
narianisin, or that from below in what is known as
Arininianisra.---but by putting the two in juxta-
position. And this lesson of what may be called the
moral conditionalness of prophecy is specially indi-
cated in that marvellous allegorical history, the Book
of Jonah, which more than any other reaches beyond
the Old Testament standpoint, and anticipates the
lessons and facts of the New Testament. Nor, I
trust, will it be considered presumptuous to suggest
that this moral conditionalness with all the possi-
bilities resulting in this case would, in part, be the
answer to such a question as this : What, if the Jews,
instead of rejecting and crucifying, had received
Jesus as the Messiah ? And it is in this sense that
I would understand the words in which our Lord ex-
plained the true position of the Baptist : ' And if ye
are willing to receive (it, or him), this is Elias, which
was for to come.' l
But even thus I have not yet given a full view of
the moral element in prophecy. For this purpose
I must refer to at least two other points. For,
first, prophetism, while confirming the historical
reality of all the institutions of the Law, presented
their spiritual bearing, without which it declared the
observance of the letter to be not only meaningless,
but an absolute perversion of their Divine purpose.
1 St. Matthew xi. 14.
v.- UNDERLYING SPIRITUAL REALITIES. 155
Beyond the opus operatum and the letter were the
Spirit and the spiritual reality to which they pointed.
Circumcision of the flesh pointed to that of the lips
and the heart ; by the side of Israel after the flesh was
Israel after the Spirit ; by the side of the Levitical,
another Priesthood, to which ' Holiness to the Lord '
was the consecration. Sacrifices were meaningless
without brokenness of heart and spirit, and they
pointed to one great sacrifice of suffering. Festivals,
fasts, and all other rites were a perversion and an
abomination, unless pervaded by the moral and
spiritual element.
Secondly. Prophetism emphatically presented it-
self, not as a finality, but rather as a preparation for
a higher, better, and more spiritual state of things.
Even as in the New Testament we are told that those
miraculous Charismata of the Spirit : prophecies,
tongues, and knowledge, belonged to a still imperfect
or preparatory state of the Church, so did prophecy,
while with one hand pointing back to the Law of
Moses, and with the other to prophetism, tell of a
time when God would make a new Covenant with
His people, and give them a new Law, not graven
on stone, but written on the heart, of which the seal
would be circumcision of the heart : a Covenant of
which the fundamental fact would be a new deliver-
ance, not from the bondage of Egypt, but from that
of sin, when He would forgive their iniquities and
156 PEOPHECY AND HISTOKY. HOT. V.
remember their sins no more or, to quote the
imagery of another prophet, when He would sprinkle
clean water upon them and they would be clean. 1
Then would prophecy indeed cease ; no man would
any more teach his neighbour, for they would all
know Him, from the least to the greatest of them.
Nor would the spirit of prophecy rest then only upon
a few chosen individuals, but the wish of Moses of
old would be fulfilled concerning all Israel, and the
Holy Spirit be outpoured on all their sons and daugh-
ters, nay, even on the slaves and handmaidens, so that
all would prophesy 2 for in those days would He
cause the Branch of Eighteousness to grow up unto
David, Who would execute judgment and righteous-
ness in the land.
Thus prophecy pointed beyond itself, and to a
spiritual fulfilment connected with the Advent of the
promised Messiah. And not only so, but it also
pointed to that period as that of the Kingdom oi
God, not now of narrow Judaic dimensions, but
wide as the world ; not of national .glory, but of
spiritual righteousness. This is the highest moral
element, the moral climax in prophecy, and in that
sense is Jesus the Messiah also most fully the Prophet.
But this line of argument stretches too far to be
followed to its end in the present course of Lectures.
In conclusion we may gather together the threads
> Ezek. xxxvi. 25. 3 Joel ii. 28, 29.
v. PROPHECY POINTS BEYOND ITSELF. 157
of this argument in a few plain and easily-answered
questions. Is it not so that the goal which the
Old Testament indicated when pointing beyond itself,
beyond its rites, institutions, and prophetism, to a
spiritual fulfilment, has, as a matter of fact, been
attained in the New Testament and in Christ ? In
His own language : is it not so, that the salvation
which is of the Jews has come to all men, since, not in
Jerusalem only, but everywhere, the true worshippers
worship the Father in Spirit and in truth ? And is
not all this because of, in, and through Jesus of
Nazareth ? Then ' Is not this the Christ,' the
Messiah ? and did not Philip truthfully say it, ' We
have found Him of whom Moses in the Law, and the
Prophets did write ' ? And, lastly, have not all things
been fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses,
and in the Prophets, and in the Psalms concerning
Him?
Here we might, under ordinary circumstances,
have paused for the present. But the terrible circum-
stances in which we find ourselves at this time, not only
require language the most explicit and emphatic, but
excuse that which is most impassioned. A great crime
is being enacted over the world, which cries to Heaven
for vengeance, and to the Church for testimony and
self- vindication. While we speak of that salvation
which is of the Jews, and of the joyous fulfilment of all
promises in Christ, other thoughts obtrude themselves,
158 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. EBOT. t,
and, like heavy clouds, crowd our horizon, and darken
out the light of our gladness. For once more has the
wild howl of unchained passion against Israel risen
above the sweet music of the dying Saviour's last
prayer : * Father, forgive them, for they know not what
they do.' Once more has the blood-stained hand of
rapine, lust, and murder sought to shake from out
the jewelled memorial cup, in which the Church had
gathered and held up in a constant Prayer of Inter-
cession, the tears which Jesus had shed over the
Jerusalem that would not receive Him tears, that
can never be dried up. And once more has the
white raiment of the. Church been fouled with blood;
her fair name been made a byword, and her hymn
of charity drowned by wild orgies. The hand raised
to point to the Cross drops in anguish. How
can we strike Judah's lyre when her captives lie
murdered, mangled in our streets ? How can we
respond with the Antiphony of Fulfilment to the
Hymn of Promise made to the virgin daughter of
Zion when her maidens are outraged, her old men
murdered, and her dwellings plundered by those who
bear the Name of Him in Whom all these promises
are Yea and Amen? The Church veils her face
in mourning ; a thrill of horror, a pang of anguish, a
cry of indignation pass through universal humanity.
Whether and what in the wonder- working Providence
of Him who brings good out of evil may be the out-
. 7. THE TERRIBLE CONTRAST. 159
come of this to Israel, we cannot say. But in the
name of God, let us clear ourselves of all complicity in
this sin and shame. We who do believe in Christ, and
because we believe in Hun, as the true Messiah we
protest with one heart and mind against this and all
like movements ! In the name of Christianity, in the
name of our Church, in the name of this land of
liberty and light, in the name of universal humanity,
we abhor it, we denounce it, we protest against it.
And yet more, as we believe, so we pray : Come,
Lord Jesus, come quickly, and by Thy glorious reign
put an end to bloodshed, rapine, and sin ! x
1 It should be explained that this Lecture was written and delivered
when the so-called Anti-Semitic movement was at its height (Feb. 1882),
and a thrill of horror passed through us all, as day by day we read of
those deeds of cruelty and bloodshed inflicted upon innocent, suffering
Israel. No language could be too strong to express abhorrence of such
a movement. The passage is retained in this book not only as a standing
protest, but because an agitation, which is equally the humiliation of the
Church and a foul blot on the civilisation of this century, has not
yet passed away, and even finds encouragement where other than this
might have been expected.
160 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. EEOT. tt
LECTURE VL
ON THE SPIRITUAL ELEMENT IN PROPHECY: THE OLD TESTA-
MENT POINTED TO A SPIRITUAL FULFILMENT IN THE KING-
DOM OF GOD.
Of which salvation the prophets have inquired and searched diligently,
who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you: searching
what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them
did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings -of Christ, and
the glory that should follow. 1 80?. PETER i. 10, 11.
IT needs not a detailed analysis of these verses to
show how closely their teaching agrees with the
record of St. Peter's preaching. For, in his first
sermon on the day of Pentecost, and especially in his
second on the occasion of his healing the lame man
in the Temple, his argument addressed to the Jews
was, as might have been expected, to this effect:.
There is nothing new or unexpected in what you
see and hear ; it is simply the fulfilment of pro-
phecy, for c all the prophets from Samuel, and those
that follow after, as many as have spoken, have
foretold of these days/
But the Apostolic statement which we have
chosen as text for this Lecture goes farther than this.
It implies: Firstly, That all prophecy was the out-
vi. PROGRESSION IN PEOPHECY. 16l
come of the Spirit of Christ in the prophets ; secondly,
that it pointed to the sufferings of the Messiah,
and the glory that should follow; and, lastly, that
while the prophets understood the general Messianic
bearing of their prophecy, the details of the manner
and time of its fulfilment were not understood by
them, but remained reserved to the historical unfold-
ing of the latter days.
This takes us another step in our argument. It
sets before us the historical character of prophecy,
as progressing pari passii with the history of Israel,
till at last its meaning fully appears in its fulfilment.
Accurately considered, this forms indeed part of
that moral element which in the last Lecture was
shown to be the great characteristic of Prophecy.
For it was not something mechanical and dead,
thrust upon the world, as it were, but an active
power for good, which grew with the moral growth
of the people, and unfolded with their capacity for
receiving and understanding it. Erom the first all
was present as St. James puts it : 1 ' Known to God
from the first beginning,' or, in St. Paul's language, 2
' part of the mystery hid from all ages in God,' and
finally made known in Christ. And each advance in
i/
history was preceded by Prophecy, of which the
object was not only the announcement of events,
but preparation for them. And because the prophets,
* Acts xv. 18. Eph. iii. 9, 10.
162 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. SECT, rt.
although they knew that their prophecies pointed
to the end, understood not the time nor the manner
of their fulfilment, therefore do we find so often
the beginning and the end, the immediate and the
final fulfilment, laid quite closely together, without
apparent connection or transition the Assur or
Edom of the then present by the side of the final
foes of the Kingdom ; the Israel of the present along
with that of the future ; the restored services of the
Temple beside the renewed worship of a Temple
made without hands, and the heavenly beside the
.earthly Jerusalem. All this awaited the ' Let there
be light ' of the last days. Meantime that which was
known to God from the beginning was successively
revealed by Him through His prophets, for the
spiritual training of His people. In the language of
Amos (hi. 7), 'Surely Jehovah God will do nothing,
but He revealeth His secrets to His servants the
prophets;' and in that of Isaiah (xlii. 9), 'Behold, the
former things are come to pass, and new things do
I declare ; before they spring forth I tell you of
them.' And so Prophecy and History proceeded,
the one as the forerunner of the other, the Spirit
of Christ in the prophets ever pointing forward to
the period of fulfilment. Then would all the great
lines of prophecy meet, and in their meeting would
their meaning become manifest.
If this historical view of prophecy characterised
EECT. VI. APOSTOLIC VIEW OF PKOPHEOY. 165
the preaching of St. Peter as the Apostle of the Jews,
it is not less apparent in what may be termed the
Biblical representatives of the opposite, or Alexan-
drian, direction : St. Stephen and the Epistle to the
Hebrews ; and in St. Paul, who in a marvellous
degree combined the Palestinian and the Grecian
direction. This explains how the largest part of St.
Stephen's address to the Council was occupied by an
historical sketch of God's Eevelation, and of Israel's
progressive disobedience thereto. Similarly, in the
Epistle to the Hebrews, after a general introduction,
chapters iii., iv., and xi. trace the prophetic view
of Israel's history, while the intermediate chapters
give that of Israel's institutions and so the main
proposition in chapter ii. is carried to its practical
application in the concluding part of the Epistle.
Lastly, we mark the same line of argument in the
preaching of St. Paul to the Jews. Thus, in his
first sermon in the Synagogue of Antioch, in Pisidia,
the prophetic history of Israel from the Exodus to
David is passed in review ; then the predictions are
referred to, which accompanied and explained this
history, and pointed from David, nay from Moses
and the Law, to Christ, the conclusion being an
application of the prophetic warnings of Isaiah and
H^'aJdmk to their contemporaries, as that of which
th", %/{/ijia#iit threatened St. Paul's hearers. 1 There
1 Acts xiii. 17-41.
M2
164 JPROPHEOY AND HISTORY. LECT. TI.
is, indeed, another line of thought regarding pro-
phecy, followed by St. Paul, and, so far as I know,
by him alone, in which the absolute or dogmatic
view of it is taken, the Law with its demands being
presented as the schoolmaster unto Christ, while the
provisions regarding sin and satisfaction sacrifices
and atonement are shown to point to Christ as their
fulfilment. To this aspect we shall refer in the
sequel.
We may safely assume that the historic and
prophetic character of the Old Testament, as prepar-
ing for, and pointing to, the Messiah, would not be
seriously questioned by the Synagogue at least, by
the orthodox part of it however strenuously the
fulfilment of the prophetic Scriptures in Christ might
be denied. But if the Divine authority of the Old
Testament is accepted, it appears to me only possible
to challenge the New Testament conclusion on one
of three grounds : First, it might be contended that
the Old Testament must be taken in an exclusively
literal sense. We have already shown that this
could not have been the case in reference to the
prophecies of the coming Kingdom of God. But
it might be argued against our general view of the
prophetic character of the Old Testament, that at
least the ordinances and institutions of the Old
Testament had no further meaning beyond them-
selves, no absolutely spiritual bearing were merely
HSOT. TL STATEMENT OF OBJECTIONS. 165
external, and not intended to be superseded by a
new and spiritual dispensation to which they pointed.
Or else, secondly ', it might be maintained that what
may be called the Christian view of the Messianic
idea in the Old Testament is entirely imaginary and
erroneous. Or, thirdly., it might be said that even if
that view were correct, the Old Testament picture
of the Messiah was essentially different from that
presented by Jesus of Nazareth.
As concerns these three objections, I think I may
say that the last may be dismissed without discus-
sion. For, if it were proved that the Old Testament
pointed beyond itself to a larger and a spiritual Law,
rites, and institutions, and if, besides, it were shown
that the Christian view of the Messianic idea in the
Old Testament is correct, few would, I suppose, be
disposed to question the inference that Jesus Christ
did embody the Old Testament ideal as conceived
by the Church. In such case we would have only
to appeal to history, and it would almost seem logic-
ally impossible to resist the argument from, the his-
torical Church. And if it were further objected that
a great majority of Christ's contemporaries did not
recognise in Him the Old Testament picture of the
Messiah, this answer would be sufficient, that these
men had no longer the proper Messianic ideal before
their minds ; that their conception of Him was no
longer true to the Old Testament, nor yet spiritual,
166 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. LECI. vi.
but that traditionalism had overgrown and crushed
out the Old Testament teaching in its higher bear-
ing : in one sentence, that the religion of the Old
Testament had already become transformed into Ju-
daism. Our Lord indeed bade them search the Old
Testament Scriptures as bearing testimony to Him,
but their eyes were holden by the hand of their
Pharisaic leaders, and their heart was hardened not
to perceive their meaning. And this : that the con-
temporaries of Christ, or at least a majority of them,
under the teaching of traditionalism, did not any
longer occupy the Old Testament standpoint in its
spiritual presentation of the Messiah, we are pre-
pared to affirm as a substantive proposition. Ac-
cordingly, we have here to deal really with only
these two questions : Did the Old Testament in its
ordinances and rites point to something spiritual,
and indicate that its observances were only tem-
porary, intended to merge into a new and spiritual
dispensation ? And, again, as quite kindred, and,
indeed, connected with it : Is what may be called
the Christian view of the Messianic idea and ideal
in the Old Testament the correct one ? The first of
these questions has in part been touched upon in
the previous Lecture, but it must now receive more
systematic and detailed consideration.
I. The Old Testament embodies not only a code
of outward observances, but points beyond their letter
LEOT. vi. PROPOSED INTERPRETATION. 167
to a deeper spiritual meaning in the present, and to a
higher spiritual fulfilment in the future. This does
not involve, even in part, the old principle of allego-
rical interpretation which characterised Alexandrian
Judaism or Jewish Hellenism, although I am ready
to admit that this embodied a certain aspect of
truth, as is even witnessed by the manner in which
it prospered and bore good fruit. But Alexandrian
allegorism was not only exegetically ungrounded ; it
had no historical basis, and was purely imaginative
in its origin and character, with all of attractiveness,
but also of logical defect, which this implies. It
invented or at least discovered the interpretation
for the sake of the truth which it wished to teach.
Not so the mode of interpretation which we propose
to adopt. Method is not fanciful, but historical,
inasmuch as it proceeds on that which actually was,
and seeks to explain institutions, not by what they
may be supposed to mean, but by the meaning which
in other parts of the Old Testament, notably in the
prophetic writings and the Psalms, is expressly at-
tached to them. This will appear as we pass in
review the principal institutions of the Old Testa-
ment. 1
We have already seen that the initiatory rite
of the Covenant, circumcision, was, even in the Pen-
tateuch, presented in its symbolic aspect, and shown
1 On what follows, see specially Bredeakamp, u, s*
168 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. MOT. VI.
to point to another circumcision, that of the lips
and the heart, which in the future would become a
great spiritual reality to all men. It is in this view
of circumcision that Moses speaks of himself as of
{ uncircunicised lips,' that is, as unprepared for great
spiritual work, 1 while in Lev. xxvi. 41 we read of
4 uncircunicised hearts,' and in Deuteronomy the com-
mand to circumcise the heart is explained as equi-
valent to being 'no more stiff-necked.' 2 Quite in
accordance with this view, Jeremiah expresses his
call to repentance in the words : ' Circumcise your-
selves to Jehovah, and take away the foreskins of your
heart, ye men of Judah and inhabitants of Jeru-
salem.' 3 And that this was intended to point to some-
thing very real, appears from the circumstance that it
forms the great Divine promise of the latter days:
* Jehovah thy God will circumcise thine heart ... to
love Jehovah thy God with all thine heart and with
all thy soul.' 4 Circumcision then was not a merely
outward rite, but symbolic of a spiritual reality ; and
it pointed beyond itself to the time of its spiritual
accomplishment. Accordingly we find that in the
prophetic writings it is associated with the glory of
the latter days. Thus Isaiah calls on the Holy City
to awake and put on her beautiful garments, for that
henceforth the uncircumcised and the unclean would
1 Ex. vi. 12. Deut.x. 16.
* Jer. iv. 4 * J)eut. xxx. 6,
7i. SPIRITUALITY OF LEGAL ORDINANCES. 169
no more enter her gates. 1 And that the outward rite
could not have been referred to, appears from this,
that Jeremiah foretells that the days would come
when Jehovah would equally punish the circumcised
with the uncircurncised, for that while the Gentiles
were uncircurncised, ' all the house of Israel were
uncircurncised in the heart.' 2 But what is this other
than the New Testament argument of St. Paul : ' He
is not a Jew which is one outwardly ; neither is
that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh.
But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly ; and circum-
cision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in
the letter ; whose praise is not of men, but of God.' 8
And as in regard to circumcision, so, and per-
haps even more emphatically, as to sacrifices. The
spiritual, as distinguished from the merely external,
view of sacrifices is always prominently brought for-
ward. Even the well-known (and too often misap-
plied 4 ) words of Samuel to Saul : * To obey is better
than sacrifices, and to hearken than the fat of rams,' 6
> Isaiah Hi. 1. 3 Jer. ix. 26.
8 Rom. ii. 28, 29. We may here note as an illustrative passage per
contra, Ber. R. 48, where Abraham is said to be seated at the gate of
Gehenna, so as to prevent those of Israel who were circumcised falling
into its flames. But, as regards grievous sinners in Israel, he puts upon
them the foreskins of such children as have died before they could be
circumcised, and then casts them into Gehenna.
4 1 Sam. xv. 22.
8 Fairly interpreted they only convey that in the alternative between
obedience and the mere opus operatum of sacrifices, the former is the more
important ; but they do not imply any depreciation of sacrifices such as
170 PEOPHEOY AND HISTORY. MOT. vr.
not only imply that sacrifices had a deeper meaning
and bearing than the mere outward act, but that this
was generally known and admitted. But when we
pass beyond this to the prophetic writings and the
Psahns, which, as Professor Delitzsch well reminds
us, must be taken into account in all such discus-
sions, the teaching of the Old Testament unmis-
takably is, that sacrifices pointed to a higher reality .
Psalm 1. reads like a withering irony on the mere opus
operatum of sacrifices, as if God would eat the flesh
of bulls or drink the blood of goats. In Psalm li.
the penitent pleads : ' Thou desirest not sacrifice,
else would I give it : Thou delightest not in burnt-
ofFering. The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit. 1
It is in the same spirit and manner that Isaiah, 1
Jeremiah, 2 Amos, 3 Hosea, 4 and Micah 5 speak of sacri-
fices as in themselves of no value. And we are
carried beyond this chiefly negative view in this most
important retrospect of the Prophet Jeremiah, C I
spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them
in the day that I brought them out of the land oi
Egypt, concerning burnt-offerings or sacrifices. But
this thing commanded I them, saying, Obey my voice,
and I will be your God, and ye shall be my people.' 6
It almost seems as if it were intended to teach the
some critics contend for. The critical exaggeration in this case resembles
that in regard to the Pauline teaching ahout the Law.
1 i. 11-14 a vi. 20. s v. 21, 22. 4 ri. 6.
6 TJ. 6-8, yii. 22, 23.
EEOT. VL
SACEIFIOES. 171
absolute worthlessness of sacrifices, viewed by them-
selves, and to point to the substitution of a spiritual
worship in their room. We seem to be catching a
faint whisper of these words in the Epistle to the
Hebrews : ' It is not possible that the blood of bulls
and of goats should take away sins.' And beyond this
did the prophets speak of another sacrifice which
would be of intrinsic value. Thus we read it in
Psalm xl., 'Sacrifice and offering Thou didst not
desire. . . . Then said I, Lo, I come: in the volume
of the book it is written of me, I delight to do Thy
wiH, oh nry Grod.' However the exegesis of this pas-
sage may be disputed, we believe that it presents this
threefold view of sacrifices : their symbolical and
transitional character ; the moral element in them ;
and the great Sacrifice of inherent value by the self-
surrender of the Eighteous One and that it points
forward to, and finds its fullest explanation in, the
great prediction of the 53rd chapter of Isaiah.
The argument, which we have sought to set forth,
gains greatly in cogency as we remember that these
utterances were not caused by any depreciation, on
the part of the prophets, either of sacrifices or of
the other ritual observances of the Old Testament.
On the contrary, if we read in Psalm li. that the
sacrifices of God are a broken spirit, we find it
immediately followed by this : ' Then shalt thou be
pleased with the sacrifices of righteousness, with
172 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. LEOT. TI.
burnt-offerings and whole burnt-offerings ; then shall
they offer bullocks upon thine altar.' And, again, it
is the same Psalmist who so earnestly pants after
spiritual fellowship with the Living God, who also
longs to go up to the hill of God, to His tabernacle
and altar. 1
Most important in this respect are the references
in the prophecies of Daniel and Malachi, but espe-
cially those in the book of Ezekiel, to ritual and
Levitical ordinances. They prove beyond question
that the prophetic standpoint did not imply any
depreciation of the ordinances and institutions of the
Law. And yet by the side of all this we find what
some have, in perhaps exaggerated language, termed
an anti-ritual direction. The solution of this seeming
difficulty must not be sought in the supposed priority
of the Prophets to the Law, but in another considera-
tion which forms one of the main points in prophecy.
Ultimately all prophecy points to ' the last [latter]
days,' or the end of days (the Acharitk hayyamim}.
This was to be the goal of the religious development
and of the history of Israel. Thus we read it in the
prophecy of Hosea, 2 that after many days in which
Israel would be without king or sacrifices true or
false they would return and seek Jehovah their God
and David their king, and fear Jehovah and His
goodness in the latter days (the Acharith hayyamim).
1 Ps. xlii., xliii. 3 iii. 6.
UHOI. w. THE 'LATTER DAYS.' 173
It was not for a gradual development into a more
spiritual worship that the Prophets looked; their
gaze was bent on the Acharith hayyamim. They
expected not a religious reformation but a reno-
vation, not the cessation of sacrifices but the ful-
filment of their prophetic idea in the latter days,
which were those of the expected Messiah and of
His Kingdom. But, for the reason previously indi-
cated, that they knew not the manner nor the time
of fulfilment, these two the present and the future
lay as yet in close, and to them, though not to us,
undistinguished, contiguity. Thus Jeremiah intro-
duces the sacrificial services into a restored Jeru-
salem, the starting point of his prophecy being the
return from the Babylonish captivity, and its goal-
point that from the final dispersion of Israel, or the
latter days. 1 The same undistinguished conjunction
appears in the prophetic Book of Isaiah. In the 56th
chapter of it we have a burning description of ' the
latter days.' Then would the sons of the strangers
join themselves to Jehovah and be brought to the
Holy Mountain, and their burnt-offerings and sacri-
fices be accepted on His altar, because His house
would be called a house of prayer- for all nations.
It is not an enlargement but a transformation of the
Jewish dispensation which is here anticipated ; not a
conversion to Israel, but to Israel's God ; not a merg
1 Jer. xvii, 26 ; xxxi. 14 ; xxxiii. 10, 11-16.
174 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. EEOT. vt
ing of all nations into Israel, but a breaking down of
separating walls ; not a universal Synagogue, but a
universal Church, in which all that had been national,
preparatory, symbolic, typical, would merge into the
spiritual reality of fulfilment. But what is this pro-
phecy from the Book of Isaiah other than a pre-
diction of the words of Christ concerning those other
sheep of His, not of the Jewish fold, whom He must
bring, and who should hear His voice, that so there
might be one flock and one Shepherd words l which
He consecrated by His latest prayer. 2 Assuredly,
it seems as difficult to understand how the fourth
Gospel which records this can be regarded as un-
Jewish, as how these prophecies of Isaiah can be
represented as merely Jewish and anti-Gentile.
To pass over other and kindred prophetic utter-
ances, those in the 60th chapter of the Book of Isaiah
must claim our attention, as specially illustrative
in our present argument. Here we find in strange
juxtaposition two apparently contradictory series of
facts. The prophecy opens with what almost seems
a denunciation of Temple and sacrificial worship.
Heaven was God's throne, and earth His footstool :
where then was the house which man would build
for Him, unless it were in the heart of the humble
and contrite ? Similarly, as regarded sacrifices, he
that offered a lamb or an oblation was in the view of
1 St, Jolin x. 16, a St. John XTii. 20, 21.
tuoii Ti. THE PRESENT AND THE FUTURE. 175
.the prophet as if he had killed some unclean animal.
And yet, by the side of these apparent denunciations,
we have a glowing description of the restoration of
that very Temple and of its sacrifices, yet of such
kind that the Gentiles would, not as proselytes of
righteousness, but as proselytes to God, have their
part in all, by the side of spiritually converted Israel.
Surely, clearer evidence than this could not be given,
that the present was ever 'regarded as prophetic of
the future ; that the future was presented in the
language and forms of the present ; and that the
sacrifices, which symbolised spiritual realities, were
also typical of that future in ' the latter days,' when
around the Great Sacrifice, and in the great World-
Temple of the Church, all nations would be gathered.
To the same effect is what the Old Testament says
.concerning the Levitical priesthood. It is not the
Epistle to the Hebrews only, but the Old Testament
itself, which teaches that, beyond the letter, there
was a deeper significance attaching to the Old
Testament idea of the priesthood ; and that, beyond
the present institutions and ministry in the outward
Temple, it pointed to higher spiritual realities, of
which it was both symbolic and prophetic. Even the
circumstance that the Levites were appointed in place
of the first-born in Israel, 1 is most significant. Like
the claim to the first-fruits, it indicated the claim of
1 Num. viii. 16, 17.
1?6 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. ZBOT. ti.
Jehovah upon His people. This fundamental prin-
ciple includes all detailed instruction that was after-
wards given. Accordingly, we find that in Exodus
xix. 5, 6, all Israel are designated Jehovah's peculiar
possession, although only on condition of being
faithful to the covenant. It is in this sense also
that we understand it, that all Israel ' shall be to
me a kingdom of priests.' The same view of the
meaning of the priesthood, as typical of God-con-
secration, is expressed in the Book of Deuteronomy
(vii. 6 ; xiv, 2 ; xxxii. 9), in the Psalms, 1 and in the
prophetic books. 2 But the final fulfilment of this
fundamental idea was reserved for the future and is
presented in that mysterious priesthood after the
order of Melchisedec, 3 and in that prophecy con-
cerning ' the latter days,' when, with reference to a
far other than the Aaronic priesthood, one probably
including the Gentiles also, this promise was to be-
come true : ' And I will also take of them for
priests and for Levites, saith Jehovah.' 4 And as we
recall the circumstances of Israel in relation to
Babylon, and the stage of revelation when these
words were uttered, and compare, or rather contrast
them with the narrow Judaism, of the time of Christ,
we can in some measure realise the spiritual altitude
of these prophecies, and feel that we must look in
1 Ps. cxxxv. 4. 3 Is. xli. 9 ; xliii. 1.
Ps. ex. 4. Isaiah Ixvi. 21.
in. THE TEACHING OF THE PSALMS. Iff
the pages of the New Testament for their fulfil-
ment.
But it is not only one or another institution, but
the whole Old Testament, which points beyond itself
and to a higher fulfilment in the future. Here we
specially mark how frequently and emphatically the
Law is referred to, not as a code of outward com-
mandments, but in its deeper and spiritual bearing
on the inward man. This especially in the Book of
Psalms, which may be described as being equally
of the Law and the Prophets, converting the teaching
of both into spiritual life-blood. Here we would
refer, as a most characteristic instance, to the teaching
of the Psalms in regard to holiness and forgiveness,
which, as in the New Testament, are conjoined. A
prominent influence in reference to these two is
ascribed to the Law necessarily, not as a code of
outward commandments, but in its spiritual aspect.
Thus in Psalm xix. the Law of the Lord is spoken
of as ' converting the heart,' the prayer being imme-
diately added for forgiveness of secret sins. Similarly,
in Psalm li. the prayer for forgiveness is joined to
one for the creation of a new heart by the Spirit.
This conjunction of the prayer for forgiveness with
that for regeneration is exceedingly characteristic of
the spirituality of religious aspiration. Psalm cxix.
may be described as a grand eulogy of the Law
in this aspect of it. And when, with the time of
K
178 PROPHECY AOT) HISTORY. SECT. Ti
Israel's completed inward departure from God, came
that of their greatest outward need, the Prophet was
not commissioned to give them any new command-
ment, still less to admonish to strict observance of
the old, but to bring the promise, which character-
istically was to this effect, that God would give them
a new heart to know Him that He was Jehovah. 1 And
that it was not in any wise connected with igno-
ration of the Law, nor, on the other hand, expected
in conjunction with a return to its merely outward
ordinances, appears from this, that the great promise
of ' the latter days ' of the Messianic time of com-
pletion was, that Jehovah would then make a new
covenant with Israel, not according to that when
He brought them out of Egypt, but one in which
He would put His Law in their inward parts, and
write it on their hearts. And most important as
adding yet another element : then would one man no
longer teach his neighbour, but all be taught directly
of God. 2 This indicates the existence of the old ele-
ments, while at the same time it points to an entire
change in the future. Then would not only the old
Covenant and the old Law, but even prophetism be
superseded, or rather fulfilled. All this in the ' latter
days,' or Messianic time, when, as Zechariah predicts,
all ritual ordinances would merge in that universal
consecration to God, in which ' Holiness unto Jeho-
1 Jer. xxiv. 7. 8 Jer. xxxi. 31-34.
71. THE PROPHETIC FUTURE. 179
vah,' the inscription on the High-Priest's mitre, would,
so to speak, be that on all vessels in common use
in Jerusalem. 1 But what does all this mean, when
translated into the prose language of history, but the
fulfilment of the Law in its spiritual aspect, such as
we find it described in the Epistles of St. Paul and,
indeed, throughout the whole New Testament ?
But even this is not all. If Psalm li. had com-
bined these two, the spiritual renewal of the heart
and the forgiveness of sins, we are told that in the
days of the promised New Covenant this would be
the gift of God to all His people. Thus Jeremiah
connects with the prediction of the new Law, which
was to be written on the heart when man's teaching
would give place to universal knowledge of God,
this promise deeply significant, even if in its then form
it applied to Israel : ' For I will forgive their iniquity,
and I will remember their sin no more.' 2 Simi-
larly Ezekiel, the priest-prophet, speaks of the time
when God would sprinkle clean water upon them,
and cleanse them from their filthiness, give them a
new heart, put His Spirit within them, take away
their stony heart, and make them to walk in His
statutes. 3 And that these promises would find their
fulfilment in the time of the Messiah, the Son of David,
is thus expressly stated by the same prophet in the
folio/wing chapter of his predictions : ' And David my
1 Zech. xiv. 20, 21. a Jer. xxxi. 34. s Ezek. xxxvi. 25-27.
180 PKOPHECY AND HISTORY. tsar. vt.
servant shall be king over them : and they all shall
have one shepherd : they shall also walk in My judg-
ments, and observe My statutes, and do them.' l And
this is what Ezekiel emphatically designates as the
covenant of peace, the everlasting covenant which
God would make. 2 Lastly, with this also agrees both
the saying of Zechariah (xiii. 1) : 'In that day there
shall be a fountain opened to the house of David, and
to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, for sin and for un-
cleanness,' and this of Micah (vii. 19, 20), that God
would cast all their sins into the depths of the sea,
and thus ' perform the truth to Jacob, and the mercy
to Abraham ' which He had ' sworn unto our fathers
from the days of old.'
Detailed as these references have been, they have
only brought us, as it were, to the threshold. Eor
beyond all these individual predictions we have the
glowing descriptions by all the prophets, but espe-
cially in the Book of Isaiah, of the time of the new
covenant, with its blessings to Israel and to man-
kind. That these bear reference to a spiritual
world-wide dispensation in the Messianic days needs
scarcely argument, any more than that all the
conditions of it have been fulfilled in that dis-
pensation which was introduced under the New
Testament. It could scarcely be imagined that at
any future period Judaism, whether of the Bab
1 Ezek. xxxvii, 24, * Ezek. xxxvii, 26-28.
. ti. tHE DO&MA.TIO VIEW OF PKOPHECY. 181
binic or the Eationalistic kind, would unfold into
such a universal religion and Kingdom of God, as the
Prophets describe. In such case the alternative must
be, either to renounce the Old Testament "hope, or
to translate it into the platitudes of a vapid Deism.
Or else if we cling to the spiritual hope set before
us by the Prophets, then must we look for the wider
fulfilment of all in that dispensation which is set
before us in the New Testament, even though it may
not yet appear as a concrete reality, but as that
towards which we are tending, and which forms the
promise and the goal of the present development.
From Judaism, which is either an anachronism,
or a revolt against the inmost idea of the Old Testa-
ment, we turn again to the Old Testament, and in
regard to it claim to have established these positions :
that the Old Testament itself pointed to spiritual
realities of which the external and the then present
were confessedly and consciously the symbols. And,
secondly, that in this it pointed for the fulfilment of
all to the ' latter ' or Messianic days.
Another, and a kindred argument, comes to us
from what we have previously referred to as the
absolute or dogmatic view of the prophetic character
of the Old Testament, as taken by St. Paul. In this
aspect he regards the whole Old Testament as pro-
phetic of the New, the righteousness of Grod with-
out the Law is manifested, being witnessed by the
182 PKOPHECY AttD HISTOK?.
Law and the Prophets.' 1 From what might be called
the purely rational standpoint, it might- be argued,
and, indeed, was argued in the Epistle to the He-
brews, that the ceremonial and ritual Law could not
have been intended as permanent, nor its provisions
have been regarded as sufficient for the atonement
of sin. But St. Paul takes even higher ground than
this. As he explains it, the Law could not reach
within, and, therefore, did not remove, rather did it
call out, that sin on which it pronounced the sen-
tence of death. Accordingly, the object of the Law
could only have been to call forth longing after
salvation. It follows, that the Law could only have
been intended as a temporary institution and to be a
schoolmaster unto Christ. But the grace to which it
pointed was from the first, and long before the Law,
conveyed unto the fathers in the promise which
could not have been annulled by that which came
after, and which was only intended for temporary
purposes and to serve as preparation for the future.
Such is the argument of the Epistle to the Kornans,
of a portion of the 2nd to the Corinthians, and espe-
cially of that to the Galatians, the main position
being summed up in these words : ' Is the Law then
against the promises of God ? God forbid ; for if
there had been a law given which could have given
life, verily righteousness should have been by the
1 Rom. ill. 21.
Mo*, vr. DEVELOPMENT OF RELIGIOUS IDEAS. 183
law. But the Scripture hath concluded all under
sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might
be given to them that believe. But before faith
came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the
faith which should afterwards be revealed. Where-
fore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto
Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But
after that faith is come, we are no longer under a
schoolmaster. For ye are all the children of God
by faith in Christ Jesus.' l
31. The detailed answer which we have sought
to give to the first question we had proposed to
ourselves, in measure also implies that to the second
great inquiry : whether or not what may be called
the Christian view of the Messianic idea and ideal is
true to the Old Testament. What we have still to
say, may perhaps be best presented in the form of a
rapid review of the historical development through
which the fundamental religious ideas passed in
Israel.
The ante-patriarchal age may be described as the
stage of infancy. During its course the general
foundations were laid, and that condition of things
was established to which the provisions of the Divine
Covenant would in the future apply. The grand
facts which then emerged to view were these : Man's
original God-relation, as God-created, and still God-
1 Gal. iii. 21-26.
184 t>ROPHfcCY AND HISTORY. ifioc. vt
like ; law, sin, death, and the promise of final re-
covery. But sin was not only an outward trans-
gression of an outward command. Springing from
evil thoughts within, sin would progress to its fur-
thest limits, and that which had begun in disobedience
to the Divine Father would end in murder of the
human brother. Yet by the side of sin appeared
also from the first, and on the ground of the Divine
promise, the origines of worship ; Divine warning
also, and Divine acknowledgment, as well as Divine
judgment. Next emerged the grand outlines of the
distinction between those who called upon God, and
who followed the merely material, and with the in-
crease of the latter, the corruption of the former,
and thereupon a universal judgment, yet with pre-
servation of the believing righteous. Erom this
sprung a new order of society, still bearing, however,
the Cain seal of judgment, which resulted in the
confusion of tongues, and the severance of mankind
into separate nations. By the side of these origines
might range, as their counterpart, the historic ful-
filment in the New Testament, beginning with the
Incarnation of the Christ, and ending with the out-
pouring of the Holy Ghost.
What here distinguishes and gives such unique
grandeur to the Old Testament narrative, is that
it professes to give not the physical, philosophical,
literary, nor political, but the purely moral and
EBOT. TL THE GREAT CONTRAST 185
spiritual history of our origines, at the game time
laying the foundations of the most distant future.
Even the hope of such a future is significant, since
heathenism as such had no Acherith hayyamim. To
the Old Testament the future is everything : the con-
dition of its existence, the rationale of its aim, the
impelling power of its development. It comes into
our world, young, fresh, and tending towards a Divine
manhood. And, dim as the primaeval promise may
be, it is the Gospel. For it tells us that man is not to
be for ever oppressed by sin, but that sin is in the end
to be utterly crushed, and that out of the moral con-
test between the Kepresentative of humanity and
that of sin, of which the condition is suffering to the
former, victory and universal deliverance would come.
The next period was the patriarchal stage, or the
age of childhood. It is characterised by all a child's
simplicity of faith, and absoluteness of obedience.
The great future now appeared mainly through its
contrast to the present. The lonely wanderer was to
become the father of all nations ; the homeless pil-
grim, the heir of all the land, nay, of all the earth.
This sets forth another feature in the development
of the Kingdom of God : that of the contrast between
the seen and the unseen, the present and the future,
appearance and reality. And this also is most fully
exhibited in the history of Christ and His Church.
Moreover, on further consideration, it will be per-
186 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. EBCT. vt
ceived that this must be the necessary outcome of the
prevalence of evil, and of that contest of suffering
which is the characteristic of the Kingdom of God,
when introduced into the world. But at the same
time the original promise began also to assume more
definite form. These two things were now clearly
marked in the further unfolding of the promise :
that its starting-point was to be in the individual,
* in Thee ; ' and that its goal-point was ' all nations,'
which were to be blessed in Him. But to mark
this starting-point was to enter into covenant, as
God did with Abraham, as father of the faithful.
The sign of it was circumcision, which indicated that,
while this covenant was to be transmitted from father
to son, its transmission was not to be merely by here-
ditary descent, but that it also implied personal sub-
mission to God's ordinance, and voluntary taking up
of the covenant obligations. From this point on-
wards alike the starting and the goal-point are
marked with ever increasing clearness.
The period which we next reach, and which, may
be designated as that of Israel's youth, was the con-
stituent period of the Covenant history. The promise
which had found its location in an individual, and
then in the patriarchal family, was now to enter the
field of the world, being, so to speak, embodied in a
nation, whose life, history, and predictions were to
be identified with the Kingdom of God, The idea,
i. STAGES OF HISTOEY. 18?
which was symbolically and typically presented in
the history and institutions of Israel was as we have
seen that of the Servant of the Lord, in opposition
to that service of sin which was unto death. This,
with all of struggle and suffering, but also with the
ultimate victory, attaching to it. The whole sub-
sequent history of Israel was the outcome and de-
velopment of that in the patriarchal and ante-patri-
archal period. Alike the ceremonial, the ritual, and
the moral Law, as well as the promises, have their
explanation and starting-point in the idea of the
Servant of the Lord. The same contrast between
the seen and the. unseen, the present and the future,
which had emerged in patriarchal history, charac-
terised that of Israel in their relation to the other
nations of the world. And the varying events which
befell Israel were determined by their faithful ad-
herence, or the opposite, to the Divine idea which
they were intended to embody.
Another stage, and we reach the period of the
monarchy, which was that of Israel's manhood and
maturity. To the idea of priesthood and of pro-
phetism, which had during the previous period been
expressed in outward form, that of royalty was now
added, but still with the underlying principle of the
King as ' the servant of the Lord.' The great promise
connected first with the patriarchs as God's anointed,
and then with Israel as a royal nation, now attached
188 pKoraEcrsr AND HISTORY.
itself to Israel's king, and became, so to speak,
individualised in David and his seed. The picture
presented in the history of David is still that of the
suffering servant of Jehovah. But, by the side of it,
that of the reigning servant of God is also placed.
And as we follow the outward history of Israel, its
great spiritual lessons appear with increasing clear-
ness. The fate of the people is more distinctly shown
to be dependent upon faithfulness to the covenant;
the prophets point out with growing clearness the
spiritual character of the Law and its institutions;
above all, the great hope of Israel in regard to the
spiritual kingdom and the king over all nations, is
presented with ever-increasing particularity and de-
finiteness as being the goal of fulfilment.
. The prophetic line which indicated the starting
point was now well-nigh completely traced ; that in
regard to the goal-point yet remained to be more
fully marked. This was done in the last stage of
Israel's history before the great pause of expectancy
that of the exile. It was the period of Israel's
decay ; but, as always, the casting off of Israel was to
become the bringing in of the Gentiles. Israel was
now placed in closest contact with the great world-
monarchies, and those new relations gave rise to
another stage, in which the grand hope entered, so
to speak, on its world-mission and history. Israel
was to become a John the Baptist to the heathen
LEOT. -vi. IN THE DAYS OF CAESAR AUGUSTUS. 189
world ; a voice in the wilderness crying to them of
the coming Christ. Once more did Providence and
grace work together. The greatest miracle was
accomplished without sign of outward miracle. The
Jewish dispersion, the spread of Grecian culture, and
the establishment of the rule of Imperial Eome, were
the three great factors, acting independently yet
harmoniously towards one great object. Then, after
the pause of expectancy, when, as regarded literary
preparation, Grecianisin, and, as regarded political
preparation, the rule of ancient Eome, had united .
all mankind, the Old Testament in its Greek ren-
dering, and the New Testament in its old and new
world-meaning, could go forth into the arena of the
world. And so the days of Csesar Augustus became
those of the coming of Christ, and of the final fulfil-
ment of prophecy.
Clearly as, from the standpoint of fulfilment, we
perceive all this, we can readily understand how till
after the coming of Christ it would appear only
dimly even to those who believed. But there is one
book in the Old Testament which, more than any
other, must have kept alive these thoughts and hopes
in Israel. It is the Book of Psalms. Let it be borne
in mind that this was at the same time the liturgy,
the hyinnody, and in great measure the dogmatics
of the Old Testament Church. Then realise that its
first beginnings date from the primitive and, in some
190 PROPHECY AM) HISTORY. EBOT. YJU
respects, barbaric times of Saul. And yet, in a
sense, it has been, and still is to the Church and to
individuals, what it had been to Israel during the
changeful periods of their troubled history. Its
grandeur of God-conception, its intense pathos of
suffering, its sweet tenderness of feeling, its child-like
simplicity of faith, and the absoluteness of its trust-
fulness, still best express our deepest religious expe-
rience. And, beyond these subjective characteristics,
are the objective earnestness of its God-proclamation
into the wide world, its view of the City of God as
the ideal State, its expectancy of the fdlnlment of all
the promises, and of the beatification of the world.
Above all does it set forth in clear lineaments the
portraiture of the Messiah-King. Thither all the lines
of thought run up. The wail of the righteous ' Suf-
ferer leads up to the agonies of the Cross ; the shout
of the king to the gladness of the Eesurrection-morn-
ing. Over and above the noise of many waves and
the rebellion of heathen nations rises loud, clear, and
for ever, the God-assertion of His kingdom, upon earth,
and the God-proclamation of the Christ into all the
world. The answering voices of the Church and of
ransomed nations, that stretch forth their hands to-
wards Him, respond : ' He hath made us, and for
Himself; we are His flock and the sheep of Bis pas-
ture ; ' all nations shall worship Him ride forth pro-
sperously, and reign for ever, 'David's greater Son !'
191
LECTURE VIL
ON THE mSTOHY OF THE EECENT CRITICISM OF THE PEN-
TATEUCH, AND ON SOME DIFFICULTIES CONNECTED WITH
ITS RESULTS.
But we hoped that it was He which should have redeemed Israel.
ST. LTTKE xxiv. 1.
WE have reached that stage in the inquiry proposed
in these Lectures, when we might have been expected
to gather together the individual predictions in the Old
Testament, with the view of presenting in them a pro-
phetic picture of the Messiah. But the exigencies of
the time, and indeed of the present argument, impose
on me another duty than once more to attempt what,
in one or another part of it, has been so often and so
well done by my predecessors. In truth, it must have
been felt in the course of this argument, that those
great questions regarding the dates and component
parts of the Pentateuch, or rather of the Mosaic
legislation, and its relation to the Prophets, which are
at present so largely engaging the attention alike of
scholars and of general readers of the Old Testament,
are of vital importance in our present inquiry.
Notwithstanding the interest awakened in the
192 PKOPHECY AND HISTORY. EBOT. TO.
subject, it may be doubted whether the history and
progress of this question are sufficiently known, intel-
ligently to follow its discussion. Accordingly, I pro-
pose to give a brief sketch of its history, before
considering the results arrived at avoiding, so far
as possible, merely technical details. 1
What may be called the traditional or Church-
view of the Mosaic date and authorship of the
Pentateuch (entertained not only by the Eoman
Catholic, the Greek, and by all the Protestant
Churches, but also by the Synagogue) prevailed with
but little and not influential exception or dissent 2
till the second half of the last century. The first
systematic attempt to trace different documents, in
the first place, in the book of Genesis (inclusive of
1 In the historic part of this outline I have largely availed myself of
the contributions of Professor Straok in Zockler's Handb. d. Theol. Wis-
sensch. vol. i., and in the article ' Pentateuch ' in vol. xi. of the 2nd ed.
of Herzog's Heal-ThicyTdop., as well as of other works especially the
various Introductions to the Old Testament, and Reuss, Gesch. d. h. Schr,
d. A. T. (passim for the history, pp. 71 &c., 452 &c., 476 &c.).
2 In that number the following may be reckoned : Isaac Israeli (in
the tenth century) ; Luther, in his Table-Talk, implies, if not the possi-
bility of doubt, yet the unimportance of the question of Mosaic authorahip
(Diestel, Gesch. d. A. Test. p. 250) ; Karlstadt (unfavourably known in
Luther-history : de canon. Ser. S. libris, 1520); A. Masius (ob. R. G.),Comm.
on Josh, in Crit. S. vol. i. (died 1573) ; Hobbes, Leviathan (1651) ; La
Peyrere, Syst. Theol. ex Prtsadam. hyp. (1655) ; Spinoza, Tract. TheoL-
pol. (1670) ; R. Simon, Hist. Crit. du V. Test. (1678) the two latter re-
markable works, specially that of Simon (comp. Diestel, u. s., pp. 352 &c.,
357, 640, 541) ; Le Clerc (Clericus, 1657-1736), Sentim. de quelques Theol.
de Soil., and then specially in the Diss. de Script. Pent. ; Vitringa (1659-
1722), Observ. S. lib. i. ; Fleury, Maun des Isr., 1760; andLe
Preuves de la Iteliy. Chrlt, i. 2.
EECT, vn. THE SYSTEM OF ASTRUC.
Exod. i. and ii.) was made by Jean Astruc (1684-
1766), a French physician, the son of a Protestant
pastor, and afterwards a convert to Roman Catho-
licism. His work, ' Conjectures sur les memoires
originaux dont il paroit que Moyse s'est servi pour
composer le livre de la Genese,' appeared anonymously
at Brussels in 1753, when the author was nearly
seventy years old. 1 Starting from the exclusive use
in different parts of Genesis of the terms Elohim and
Jehovah, he ascribed the portions in which either the
one or the other designation occurred to separate
documents, which he respectively marked by the
letters A and B. Those parts in which there were
repetitions of the same narrative, and the name of
God did not occur, he ascribed to another document 2
which he called C. Finally, those narratives which
seemed to him foreign to the history of the Jewish
people he ranged in yet a fourth column, D, which,
Ihowever, really comprised various documents (eight
in number), and which he marked by the letters E
to M. Thus the book of Genesis was composed of
eleven documents (A, B, 0, and E to M). 3
The investigations of Astruc soon found a more
.congenial soil, and received fuller development, in
1 A very full analysis of the work is given by Bohmer (article
* Astruc ' in Herzog's Real-Encykl. (2nd ed., vol. i.).
2 Comprising Gen. vii., xx., xxiii., xxiv.
3 These letters do not, however, mark their respective dates and suc-
cession.
O
194 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. EECT. vn.
Germany. Here (after a few not influential prede-
cessors) 1 we have specially to name J. G. Eichhorn, 2
whose * Introduction to the Old Testament ' (in 5
vols.) appeared at Leipsic in 1780-1783, and rapidly
passed through several editions. 3 The work of Eich-
horn lays down the main principles and lines which
have since been followed in German criticism of the
Pentateuch. After stating ,the various reasons for
his distinction of the two documents which he traces
in Genesis, Eichhorn endeavours to prove that each
of them is again based upon a previous document,
arriving at the final conclusion that the Jehovah-
document had finished with the death of Joseph, the
1 Jerusalem, Brief e u. d. Mos. Schr., 1762.
2 However we may differ from his views, Eichhorn was one of the
most learned and brilliant, and happily also one of the most successful
theological writers of Germany. He became Professor at Jena in 1775,
when only twenty-three years of age ; he lectured twenty-four hours (and
more) every week even at the close of his life, eighteen hours a week ;
treated of and wrote on a great variety of historical subjects not connected
with theology, and died in 1827 at the age of seventy-five. His investi-
gations are thorough, lucid, and able. He may not only be designated the
father of modern German criticism, but his investigations have been of
such permanent influence that, until the latest development of Pentateuch-
criticism, the remark of Diestel (u. s. p. 610) held true that, apart from
questions about authorship and date, criticism has not since advanced any
really new element. And, however we may dispute some of his conclu-
s ions, or differ from the direction which criticism b as since taken, we cannot
but agree with Bertheau (Herzog's Rcal-Encyhl. iv. p. 115) that Eich-
horn's main object was apologetic, in defence as he conceived it of the
Bible against the Deists and Materialists of his time. This, indeed,
impresses itself on my own mind in almost every part of his ' Introduc-
tion,' and he has even anticipated and answered objections which E. Reusa
(u.s.) has lately restated and urged as if they had never been met.
3 The edition from which I quote is the fourth (1823, 1824).
. vn. THE THEORY OF EIOHHORN. 195
Elohim-document with the public appearance of
Moses, 1 and that these two documents may have been
put together by someone before Moses (p. 94)
although not in their completeness, but often in frag-
mentary form, in accordance with the plan of the
compiler, and with not unfrequent glosses and inter-
polations. These three elements (the Elohistic, the
Jehovistic, and glosses) Eichhorn traces in detail
through the Book of Genesis (pp. 107-110). The
author next proceeds to vindicate the genuineness of
Genesis 2 and to defend its high antiquity (pp. 135-
172) by arguments well worthy of consideration.
Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, Eich-
horn regards as older than all the other books in the
Old Testament, proving this both from their language
and contents (pp. 187-193), and from later history.
These books cannot be post-Mosaic, notably they
have neither been written nor compiled by Ezra,
although these Mosaic documents have passed through
many hands and received glosses and additions. But
all this before the time of Ezra, since otherwise the
Samaritans would not have accepted the Pentateuch
(pp. 204-205). Other reasons confirmatory of this
view are given. It is further shown that these books
could not have been composed at the time of Josiah, 3
nor yet between that of Joshua and David, but must
1 Eichhorn, vol. iii. 91.
8 This is vindicated in detail, pp. 110-135. 2 Kings xxiL
02
196 PROPHECY AND HISTOEY. LEOT. vn,
have originated from documents by Moses and some
of his contemporaries, although (as already remarked)
not without la.ter interpolations, alterations, and
additions. The notices of these by Eichhorn mark
the points of departure for later and more destructive
criticism. The arguments by which all these views
are supported in .detail are very interesting and
deserve the attention of modern critics. Emphatic is
the testimony of Eichhorn in favour of what is now
known as the ' Priest-Code,' * and very detailed the
examination of Numbers, which is followed (p. 322)
by a refutation of objections and a demonstration of
the authenticity of the Pentateuch which, it is de-
clared ' not even the most boundless scepticism
could regard as fictitious ' the analysis closing with
the literary history of the subject.
I have been thus detailed in the analysis of Eich-
horn's argument, as not only the beginning of modern
criticism, but because it deserves more serious atten-
tion than it has of late received. To complete this
part of our account, we add that K. D. Ilgen 2 sought
to show the existence of a second ' Elohist,' against
which Eichhorn protested, and that the contention
of Ilgen was further followed out by Hupfeld, 3 and
by Ewald in his 4 History of Israel.' To mark yet
another step De Wette 4 claimed a separate author-
1 Specially Lev. i. 1. to xxvii. 34.
8 Urkunden d. Jerus. Tempel-Arch,, 1798.
8 Die Quellen d. Gen., 1853. 4 eitr. z. Eiril. ind. A. Test., 1806.
m THREE GROUPS OP CRITICISM. 19?
ship for Deuteronomy ; Bleek 1 showed, that the Book
of Joshua really formed part of what originally was
a Hexateuch ; while Ewald and others extended the
proposed criticism to all parts of this work. The
denial of the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch
was, as might be expected, further developed by
successive critics, whose special views it were out
of place to describe in detail the final result being
briefly this, that the existence in Mosaic times of
almost any part of the Pentateuch was denied.
2. From this review of the history, we pass to
a sketch of the present state of the controversy.
Generally speaking, the various views advocated may
be grouped under three headings :
A. The first of these bears the name of the * Frag-
ments-hypothesis.' According to its advocates, we
can discover so many interpolations, glosses, and
repetitions in the Pentateuch, that the work must
be regarded as a collection of separate documents,
thrown together without order or care by one or
more redactors, with the view of preserving all the
literary remains of the past. "With this theory, which
is now generally abandoned, the names of Vater,' 2
of our own countryman Dr. A. Greddes, and of A.
Th. Hartmann, 3 are connected.
B. According to the second theory, which is
1 First in Rosenmiiller's JBibl. Repertor. 1822.
9 Comm. z. Pent., 1802-1805. 8 Hist. Krit. ForscK, 1810.
19& t>EOPHECY AND HISTORY. 'racr. vtt,
designated the ' Supplement-hypothesis,' the work of
the Elohist was the oldest in the collection, and then
supplemented by that of the Jehovist, Deuteronomy
having been added at a later period. With this view
the names of Tuch, 1 Bleek, Lengerke, 2 and formerly
also of Delitzsch, 3 are identified. This hypothesis
also has been virtually abandoned by modern
critics.
0. The third theory, known as the ' Document-
hypothesis,' is that which at present is most gene-
rally received. According to its advocates the whole
or most of the Pentateuch consists of various docu-
ments, which have been redacted by two or more
persons the original documents themselves being
classed as the ' First Elohist,' the ' Second Elohist,'
the ' Jehovist,' and the ' Deuteronomist.'
It will be noticed that, in its outline, this hypo-
thesis is both general and vague. It leaves room for
the widest differences in regard to the documents, all,
or some, of which may, in our Pentateuch, appear in
their original or in an altered form ' redacted ' and
' re-redacted ; ' or may have been incorporated in a
previous work, and then re-incorporated in another.
Moreover, the theory itself does not settle the ques-
tion as to the date of the composition, emendation,
redaction, or incorporation of the various documents
leaving all these points undetermined, or rather in
1 Comm, ii. d. Gen,., 1838. 2 Kanaan, 1844. s Comm. u. d. Gen,
LEOT.Yii. THE 'DOCUMENT-HYPOTHESIS.' 199
dispute, between tlie various critics. And yet, mani-
festly the most important question is that about the
date of the contents of the Pentateuch : whether,
broadly speaking, it truly represents, as a whole, the
Mosaic legislation, or else must be pronounced, in
regard to any such pretension, as in the main a later
forgery. On this point it seems, to me at least,
difficult to understand how the alternative and ques-
tion at issue can be misapprehended, although it is
only fair to say that there are scholars, both on the
Continent and among ourselves, who hold the late
date and non-Mosaic composition of so large a part
of the Pentateuch, and yet utterly refuse the se-
quences which seem to me the logical inference from
these views. Lastly, it should be added that there
are still scholars in Germany and, no doubt, in our
own country, who defend the unity and Mosaic
authorship, or at least redaction, of the whole Penta-
teuch. It must, however, be admitted that their op-
ponents have justice on their side in charging them
with want of consistency in their views. 1
We have said that there was room within the
document-hypothesis for the most divergent views
on many important questions. Till lately it might,
indeed, have been boasted that, although many,
and, as we should have thought, serious differ-
ences prevailed on matters of detail, there was sub-
1 Comp. Diestel, u. s. pp. 616-618 ; and Strack, Real-Encyk, xi. p. 442,
200 PROPHECY AND HISTOEY. IECT. TO.
stantial agreement on all leading points, such as the
relative age of the chief documents composing the
Pentateuch ; the existence of certain sections which
are older than any of the documents of which the
Pentateuch is composed j 1 and the combination of the
other principal documents into one work which was
completed before the time of the Deuteronornist. But
this agreement no longer exists, so far as the most
important points are concerned, unless it were in this,
that only small fragments in the Pentateuch are dated
from Mosaic times, and that even these have been ar-
ranged and rearranged in strangest manner. But,
by the side of this, there are on many questions ab-
solute and irreconcilable differences between various
critics. These concern: the number of documents in
the Pentateuch, and the number of ' redactors,' who,
in a certain sense, may be regarded as additional
writers ; the relation, order, and succession of these
documents and of their redactions ; and, lastly, the
respective date or age of some of these documents
and redactions. In evidence of the differences pre-
vailing, the various views on the supposed age of
the documents composing the Pentateuch have been
arranged in seven, or, more strictly speaking, ten 2
separate classes, to each of which the name, or
1 Such as the Decalogue, the Book of the Covenant : Ex. xx. 22-xxiii.,
the principal part of Ex. xv., and other pieces.
8 The former in the Real-EncyU., the latter in Zb'ckler's Handbuch,
ttttt. Tir. THE THEORY OF WELLHAUSEN. - 201
names, of distinguished critics are attached. In
other words, on the important question of the
arrangement and relative age of some of the docu-
ments composing the Pentateuch, seven, or, more
properly, ten, diverging views prevail ; * while in
regard to some of them it may be said that opposite
conclusions have been derived by equally competent
scholars from the same data. From all this the
impartial observer will derive at least this in-
ference, that, where these conclusions so differ, they
cannot rest on irrefragable grounds, but must to
a large extent have been influenced by subjective
considerations.
But all other differences pale into insignificance
by the side of the fundamental divergence intro-
duced by what is popularly known as the theory
of Wellhausen. We call it by his name, not because
it originated with him, but because of his lucid and
popular advocacy, and his thorough application of
it to all questions connected with Hebrew history
and literature ; and because its recent presentation,
both in Germany and in this country, has identi-
fied the theory with his name. On the other
hand, it is only fair to state, even at this stage,
that many scholars whose names are identified with
Hebrew learning have, on critical grounds, refused
to accept his conclusions. The genesis of the theory
1 See the points of agreement and disagreement in Zb'ckler (u. s.), pp.
135-138.
202 PROPHECY AND HISTOHY; iEOT. tit
is not without interest. Vatke 1 and George 2 con-
tended, chiefly on philosophical grounds, that the
Book of Deuteronomy, which was supposed to date
from the time of Josiah, was older than the legislation
of the other books in the Pentateuch. This position
was next advocated on critical grounds by other
writers. Thus E. Eeuss (since 1833) laboured to
establish that the notices in the historical books 3
implied what was contradictory to the provisions of
the so-called Mosaic law, and hence that the latter
could not have existed at the time ; 4 that the prophets
of the eighth and ninth centuries B.C. knew nothing
of a Mosaic code ; that Jeremiah was the first pro-
phet who spoke of a written Law, and that his refer-
ences were exclusively to Deuteronomy ; and, lastly,
that Deuteronomy (iv. 45 to ch. xxviii.) was the oldest
portion of the Pentateuch-legislation, being the very
book which the priests in the time of Josiah pretended
(pretendaienf) to have found in the Temple ; while
Ezekiel (xl.-xlviii.) was anterior to the redaction of
the ritual code and of the laws (the 'Priest-Code')
which the Jewish priesthood afterwards introduced
into the Pentateuch.
The most important argument on which this
theory rests is the supposed ignoring of the Mosaic
Law in the historical books, and the inconsistency of
1 Die Bibl. TheoL 2 Die Aelter. Jud, Feste both, works in 1855.
8 Judges, Samuel, and partly Kings.
* See Reuss, Gesch. d. h. Schr. pp. 87, 92, 231, 249-254. The details
I do not care to reproduce.
laser. VH. HISTORIC GROUNDS OF THE THEORY. 203
its provision with the state of matters then existing.
Full reference will be made to this in the sequel.
At present .we only add, that this argument was
capable of wide appli cation, notably to all the re-
ligious institutions referred to in the Pentateuch :
sacrifices, the priesthood, "the central place of
worship, and the great festivals. The theory just
described broke with all the past. For, whereas
Deuteronomy had formerly been regarded as being,
on any supposition, the latest book in the Pentateuch,
it was now declared to be the earliest, while the
Levitical legislation in the Pentateuch was relegated
to the times of the Exile. It follows that there must
have been an immense difference between the times
before, and those after, Josiah, when Deuteronomy
first emerged. It would further follow that the
earlier period of Jewish history was one of religious
barbarism, confusion, and mostly worship of nature,
when the voice of the prophets brooded over the
moral chaos, and sought to introduce order in it.
To other sequences of a theory so destructive, and
which, even at this stage, I venture to designate
as utterly incompatible with the facts of the case,
reference will be made in the sequel.
The theory of Eeuss was at first coldly received,
and only gained adherents when developed by his
pupils. One of them, K. H. Graf (1869), maintained 1
that the ' original document ' [the old historical work
1 Die GescJt. Bucher d. A, T.. 1866.
204 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. LECT. TO.
of the Elohist] had been successively recast by the
Jehovist and the Deuteronomist, while the code of
the middle books in the Pentateuch l was certainly
post-exilian. This view he afterwards modified,
retracting what he had said about the ' original
document ' (the Grundschriff), which, in direct con-
tradiction to his former contention, he now declared
to have been post- exilian, and, indeed, to form the
latest part of the Pentateuch. Graf was followed
in much the same direction by Kayser. 2
We have now, lastly, to sketch the system of
Wellhausen, which may most conveniently be studied
in his ' History of Israel,' 3 of which only the first
volume has as yet appeared ; 4 and in the article
' Israel ' in the ' Encyclopedia Britannica,' 5 where it
is presented with much greater moderation of lan-
guage and form than in the ' History.' 6 To avoid the
possibility of personal bias in our account of Well-
1 Ex. xii. 1-28, 43-51; xxv.-xxxi. ; xxxv.-xl. ; all Levit. ; Numb.
i.-x. 28 ; xv. ; in part xvi. and xvii. ; xviii. ; xix. ; xxviii.-xxxi. ;
xxxv. 16-xxxvi. 2 Das Vorexil. B. d. Urgesch. Isr., 1874.
3 Gesch. Israels, Berlin, 1878.
* 442 pages. . 5 Vol. xiii. pp. 396, &c.
a To these two works must now be added the Prolegomena sur
Gesch. Isr. (1883), which is only a second edition, with quite unimportant
changes, of the ' History,' and with a new Preface, the tone of which,
irrespective of theological opinions, even the most ardent admirers of
Wellhausen must deplore ; and, lastly, the hook called Skizzen und
Vorarleiten (1884), of which the first fasciculus is devoted to an abstract
of Israelitish history. This is, in reality, a slightly altered form of the
article in the Encycl. Brit. But a curious literary question arises in con-
nection with it. While the article in the Encycl, is apparently a trans-
lation of the German original now given, there are, as I have found on
. viz. THE THEORY OF WELLHATJSEN.
hausen's views, we propose, so far as possible, to
follow the sketch of Professor Strack, verifying it by
constant reference to Wellhausen's writings.
At the outset we are warned not to look in the
Pentateuch for anything really Mosaic. Even the
Decalogue is not Mosaic; in truth, the song of
Deborah, in Judges v., may be the oldest historical
monument in the Old Testament. 1 It is indeed true
that the foundation-document which "Wellhausen calls
the ' Priest-Code,' 2 assumes the guise of the Mosaic
age, seeking, so far as possible, to mask itself
(p. 9), and that it seriously pretends to be the legisla-
tion of the wilderness, assuming an archaic appear-
ance so as to hide the real date of its composition
(p. 10). But the true critic has no difficulty in seeing
comparison of some parts, modifications in the wording, some of them
slight, but all producing a decidedly softening effect as regards the argu-
ment in its English garb. To one important alteration I -will here
call attention. In the JEncycl. Brit., p, 398 b, we read of the Ark of
the Covenant, ' It was a standard [the italics are always ours] adapted
primarily to the requirements of a wandering and warlike life; bi'ought
back from the field, it became a symbol of Jehovah's presence, the central
seat of His worship.' In the Skizzen u. Vorarb., however, the passage reads
thus : ' It [the Ark] was an idol, which was primarily intended
[berechnet] for a wandering and camp-life ; brought back from the field,
it still remained, as token of the presence of Jehovab, the central point
of His worship.' Is the difference between the two passages due to a
later modification or to a fuller expression of his views by Wellhausen ?
The difference between them is, at least, sufficiently marked and im-
portant.
1 Gesch.-p. 309.
8 Note that ( the original document,' or ' the first Elohist,' is Well-
hauseu's Priest-Code ; the ' second Elohist ' is his E, while the Jahvist
(not Jehovist, who is JE) is J.
206 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. tfici. Tit
through this disguise. The * book of the Covenant ' *
is ' Jahvistic.' The Jehovist (JE) who must not
be confounded with the Jahvist (J) dates from the
golden age of kings and prophets, before the Assyrian
conquest of Israel or Judah. The substance of the
two works, J and E, of which that of the Jehovist
is composed, dates from before the prophets, but each
of them has been repeatedly re-edited before the work
appeared in the form of JE, or the Jehovist. We
are bidden to remark that J presents more of the real
original state of things, and shows less trace of pro-
phetic influence than E (p. 371). The document J
breaks off suddenly at the blessing of Balaam,
although there may be traces of the work in Numb,
xxv. 1-5, and Deut. xxxiv. But when we speak of JE
(the Jehovist work), we must remember that, as
already stated, the documents do not appear in their
original form, but have been edited and re-edited
O '
with additions ; in fact, they are J 3 E 3 . Deuteronomy,
or rather the original D, appeared shortly before the
eighteenth year of Josiah, when it only contained
chapters xii.-xxvi. Then, ' not before the exile,' D
underwent a twofold redaction, of which the first
prefaced D by Deut. i.-iv., and tacked to it chapter
xxvii., while the next redaction added at the be-
ginning chs. v. xi., and at the end chs. xxviii. xxx.
combination of these two editions and the in-
1 Ex. XX.; xxi.-xxiii. 19.
LECT. 7H. COMPOSITION OP THE PENTATEUCH. 20f
sertion of the work into JE was probably made at the
same time and by the same Deuteronoinist as the
combination of J and E into JE (p. 370).
But this is not nearly all. The section Lev.
xvii.-xxvi. is said to represent what originally was
a separate and distinct code of laws, the writer of
which made manifold use of previous documents. It
dates from the close of, or after the Exile, and is
more cognate to Ezekiel than to the 'Priest-Code,'
into which, after due redaction, it was inserted. In
fact, the redaction was made by the same hand as
the Priest-Code (pp. 388, 391, 396). Putting aside
JE and D, we have still to consider the ' Priest-Code '
itself, which embraces the legislation of the middle
books of the Pentateuch. 1 It is posterior to
Ezekiel (his supposed legislation: Ezek. xl.-xlviii.),
and must be viewed, not as the product of one
person, but * as a conglomerate, as it were, the out-
come of a whole school.' In its language and con-
tents, as well as by direct references, it is interwoven
with an historical document Q (the book of the
four quatuor covenants), to which originally the
following had belonged : Ex. xxv.-xxix. ; Lev. ix. ;
x. 1-5 ; 12-15 ; xvi. ; Numb. i. 1-16 ; i. 48 iii. 9 ;
in. 15 x. 28 ; xvi. in part ; xvii. ; xviii. ; xxv. 6-19 ;
xxvi. ; xxvii. ; xxxii. in part ; xxxiii. 50 xxxvi. The
1 Ex. xxv.-xxxi. ; xxxv.-xl. ; Levit. ; Numb. i.-x. ; xv.-xix. j xxv.-
xvi.j with, few exceptions.
208 PROPHECY AND EISTORTT. IEC.
whole Pentateucli unknown as such till then was
finally published by Ezra in or about the year 444, 1
c although many minor amendments and considerable
additions may have been made at a later date. 2 It
should, however, be added, that other critics of that
school, such as Reuss, Graf, Kayser, hold that only
the work P, or even its main part, was published by
Ezra, the rest at a later period. But, as Strack rightly
objects : in that case it seems impossible to explain
how D, which is supposed, in many points, to con-
tradict P, could have remained ' latent ' for a con-
siderable period after the Exile ; and still more, to
understand how the Samaritans had accepted the
Pentateuch at a period not later than Nehemiah. 3
These objections might evidently be applied and
extended to many other points in the system.
3. Probably the first impressions derived from the
analysis of the system of Wellhausen will be that of
its extreme elaborateness and intricacy. Indeed, we
fear that with all our care we have failed to make it
quite intelligible in its details the main fact only
standing out, that the great body of Mosaic legisla-
tion, such as we have been wont to regard it, is
declared to be post-exilian. The theory reflects great
credit on the industry, and especially the ingenuity
of its author ; but common sense instinctively rejects
1 Neli. viii. 1-x. 40.
2 Enaycl. Brit. xiii. pp. 418 b, 419 a ; Gesch. pp. 423-425.
3 Neli. xiii. 28 ; Jos. Ant. xi. 7. 8.
. TO. (JENEKAL OBJECTIONS. 200
it as incredible. A work so elaborately tesselated,
into which so many different documents, redacted
and re-redacted, have been so cunningly inserted,
that one piece breaks off in the middle of a chapter,
or even of a verse, to which a piece from a different
document is joined, and so on, till the mind becomes
bewildered amidst documents and redactions : such a
piece of literary mosaic has never been done, so far
as we know, and we refuse to believe that it could
have been done. Whatever objections may be raised
against what is called the ' traditional ' view, what-
ever difficulties may attach to the conciliation of the
supposed differences between notices in the historical
books and the enactments of the Mosaic code, the
theory of Wellhausen is not the thread to lead us out
of, rather that to lead us into, the labyrinth. Viewed
quite from the outside, it only adds to our difficulties.
Indeed, although the distinction between the two
great documents known as those of the Elohist and
the Jahvist does not depend merely on the distinc-
tive use of the designations Elohim and Jehovah
being supported by other and weighty considerations
it makes us almost doubt what weight should be
attached to this fundamental distinction. We put
aside this, that the different use of the two Names
has been explained as expressing a difference of
meaning, each presenting a special relation of God
to man because, to our thinking, this explanation
P
^EOPHECY AND HlSMlY. EEOT.
does not fully meet the case. But, supposing the
"workmanship of the composition and redaction of
the Pentateuch to have been so manifold and so
cunning as Wellhausen's theory implies indeed, in
almost any case of multiple composition, unless of
*
the most clumsy Mud it seems almost impossible
to believe that one of the later writers or redactors,
into whose hands E and J had come, might not
sometimes have interchanged, for reasons of his
own, the two designations ; or else himself have used
them promiscuously, as he leaned towards one or
the other document, or the exigencies of the narra-
tive pointed to the use of either one or the other.
Hence it seems extremely difficult entirely to rely
on the great test, with which the absolute separ-
ation of documents originally started.
And more than this requires to be taken into
account. Ewald had long ago remarked, 1 that the
last writer or redactor of the Pentateuch could not
have thought that it contained any mere repetitions
or contradictory accounts of the same facts. This
most reasonable canon gains immensely in application
as we recall, on Wellhausen's theory, the elaborate-
ness of workmanship, the immense skill displayed in
it, and the multiplicity of composition and redaction
in the Pentateuch . Only a very clumsy litterateur would
have left so many contradictions and inconsistencies
1 TheoL Stud. u. Krit. 1831, p. 604.
Beii fob feENEEAL OBJECTIONS'.
unnoticed, if indeed they existed. And it seems
utterly inconceivable nothing short of impossible
that, in a work which had passed through so many
hands, all of them admittedly able, and which, on
Wellhausen's supposition, was, at least in great part,
designed shall we not say, falsified for a definite
purpose, so much should have been left, which was
transparently inconsistent with, and opposed to, the
purpose in view. And when we go a step further,
and recall that the historical books which contain
the notices that are said to be in direct contradiction
to the Pentateuch legislation, 1 were at least manipu-
lated by those to whom we owe the Pentateuch, it
seems still more impossible to believe that these
notices could have been considered, or, indeed, could
1 I am. quite aware that the earlier historical "books are only supposed
to have heen recast Deuteronomistically, i.e. in the spirit of Deuteronomy,
while Chronicles is said to have heen done in that of the Priest-Oode.
But "Wellhausen himself says, in regard to Judges, Samuel, and Kings,
that in them ( the fact of a radical difference between the ancient practice
and the [Deuteronomic] Law as a whole is not denied, although in some
instances the past is recast (umgedichtef) in conformity with the ideal/
so that the existence of the contrast side hy side is admitted. Besides, it
seems to me impossible to believe that those who were influential enough
to manufacture and introduce the Priest-Code and Chronicles not to
speak of so much else would have heen unable to remove from the other
historical books what was grossly inconsistent with the assertions
on which their whole system was based. And Wellhausen himself
admits a reference to the Priest-Code in the account of the Temple
(1 Kings vi.-viii.), which, for reasons which do not clearly appear, he
declares to be full of corrections and interpolations, and from which in
1 Kings viii. 64 and 2 Kings xvi. 14, 15, the notice of Solomon's altar of
brass had been removed, ' in order to avoid collision with the altar of brass
[earth?] of Moses (p. 294). Similarly 1 Sam. ii. 22 is a Priest-Code
P2
212 PEOPHEOY AKD fltSTOElT. ttsci. vii.
have been, quite inconsistent * with the arrangements
introduced by the Pentateuch. These writers must
have seen some mode of conciliating the seeming
discrepancies, or else and this seems not too bold a
statement, on Wellhausen's theory they would have
unhesitatingly removed them.
These considerations cannot, we feel assured, be
overlooked when thinking of such a theory as that
under review. There are others which must weigh
with every serious mind and every critical student.
I have previously expressed, with all gravity, my
personal feeling that, if the theory in question, with
all that it implies, were true, it would seem logically
impossible to maintain the claims of Christ as the
Old Testament Messiah of Moses and the Prophets,
and the Son of David. This is not said with the
view of foreclosing inquiry, or influencing its results.
interpolation, because it speaks of the 'tabernacle,' which, according to
Wellhansen, never existed, and was only an invention of the Priest-
Code. The notices 1 Sain, iv.-vi. are even represented to be inconsistent
with the existence of the Tabernacle, while the reference in 1 Kings viii. 4
is manipulated in a particular manner (pp. 43-46). Such notices as, for
example, Josh. ix. '27 are declared ' anachronisms.'
1 It is even more difficult to believe that a twofold account, grossly
inconsistent with each other, should have been placed side by side in the
historical books. Such, however, Wellhausen finds in the Song of
Deborah as compared with the preceding historical account of the event,
and in the narrative about Gideon closing Josh. viii. 1-8 a& compared
with that which he supposes to open with Josh. viii. 4. I venture to
assert that unprejudiced readers will not discover any such inconsis-
tencies between the supposed twofold narratives as the hyper-ingenuity
of Wellhausen has discovered. Naturally, it will be otherwise if the
narratives are approached with Wellhausen's theory on the mind.
TH. SEQUENCES OF THE THEORY. 21 3
On the contrary, I would insist, as strongly as our
opponents, that every question should be examined
on its own merits, irrespective of preconceived
opinions or possible consequences. In fact, I claim
for our side equal, if not greater, independence, since
those acquainted with the controversy will scarcely
deny that much of the reasoning on the other side
has been prompted by, and grounded, on a priori
conclusions about the possibility of the miraculous,
prophetism, the supposed relation between God
and Israel, and similar matters. But, while not
wishing to prejudice inquiry by the consideration
of the consequences involved, these are sufficiently
grave to render extreme care and caution imperative.
When we read, as the outcome of the theory we are
combating, that ' what has gained for the history of
Israel pre-eminently the designation of sacred is
mostly -due to what a later period has painted over
the original picture,' x we feel that the whole basis of
our religion is being seriously shaken. For, if the
largest portions of the Old Testament are myths,
legends, and forgeries, it would be difficult to retain
any belief in the trustworthiness of the rest. And,
in truth, this school of criticism has spoken with
sufficient plainness on the subject. We are assured
that we do not owe to Moses any of the laws or
historical notices in the Pentateuch ; nor yet, in aU
1 Wellhausen, Qesch. p. 809.
214 PKOPHECY AND HISTORY. EECT. vn.
probability, to David any of the Psalms, nor to Solo-
mon any of the Proverbs. The historical books are
often recast and retouched in the spirit of the later
Law, and indeed unreliable. 1 And here I must add
that the manipulations of passages in the historical
(and in the prophetical) books which appear inconsis-
tent with the new theory of the date and authorship
of the Pentateuch, 2 are sometimes, to say the least,
peculiar. It is easy to get rid of such passages by
declaring them interpolations or corrupted texts,
but solid reasons of an absolute character must
be adduced for the assertion, and not merely such
a priori assertions as that they are inconsistent with
the proposed Pentateuch theory. It were easy
in this manner to cut off, so to speak, the head
of every opponent so soon as he emerges ; but the
justice of the procedure has in each case to be
1 See page 212 and the notes.
2 See the notes above referred to. Many instances of critical vio-
lence might here be quoted. Thus it is difficult to understand how
Exod. xx. 24 can be quoted in proof that there was no central place of
sacrifice, but that these might be offered in any place, or to accept this
explanation of the expressly limiting words, ' in all places where i record
My Name ' : ' This means no more than that people did not like it to
appear that the place where the intercession between heaven and earth
took place had been arbitrarily chosen, but regarded it as somehow
(irgendwie) selected by the Deity itself for its service' (Gesch. p. 31).
Similarly to mention only one other instance it seems difficult to discover
in Neh. viii.-x. any warrant for the statement that the Pentateuch had
been unknown till then, and was now for the first time published and
introduced. There are many other similar instances of critical violence,
but these cannot be examined in detail in this book.
EECT. vn. GENERAL OBJECTIONS. 215
vindicated before the tribunal of criticism. And,
although the impression made by the accentuation
of difficulties and seeming inconsistencies, which are
all removed by the new theory, may be that of a
brilliant discovery, we distrust it from its inception,
not only for the reasons already adduced, and for
those which will be stated in the sequel, but for
its very brilliancy, and the ease with which every-
thing may be fitted into its Procrustes-bed.
Similar violence is done to much in the pro-
phetic writings and the Psalms by the new school
of criticism. 1 More especially is this the case in
regard to EzekieL A careful investigation, 2 the
results of which have not yet been met by the school
of Wellhausen, has established that EzeMel reflects
back upon the Pentateuch, and not the reverse.
Nor can we even at this stage for a moment hesitate
not only to dissent from the theory of Wellhausen
with regard to the post-exilian date of the legislation
in the Priest-Code, but also to express our con-
viction that Deuteronomy could not have been
composed so late as about the time of its recovery
in the reign of King Josiah. To begin with, the
1 Oomp. Strack in the Real-EneyU. p. 453, and the authorities there
referred to.
2 Comp. Hoffmann, Mag. fiir d. Wissemch. d. Judenth., 1879, pp,
210-215. The remarkable series of articles of which this forms part, and
the special relation between EzeMel and the Priest-Code, will be referred
to in the next Lecture.
216 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. LEOT, vn.
statement that the account of its finding l means
that it had not previously existed, but been just
written, is merely an a priori gloss upon the text
a suggestio mali, for which the text itself affords
no warrant. It might seem almost as reasonable
to deny the truth of the whole narrative as that
of the part which speaks of the finding of the Law.
Moreover, this view of 2 Kings xxii. 8 is not only
inconsistent with what is expressly characterised
in v. 13 as the sins of their fathers in not formerly
obeying ' the words of this book,' but the whole
account about the finding of the Book of the Law
presupposes a general knowledge and belief in the
existence of such a code, which it would be most
unreasonable to assume could have been palmed
off by Hezekiah as Mosaic, or received by the people
as such, if no one had ever heard of the existence
of a written Mosaic legislation. Lastly, there are
many provisions in the so-called Priest-Code incon-
sistent with the idea of its post-exilian origin, 2 just
as there are notices in Deuteronomy incompatible
1 2 Kings xxii. 8.
2 Among these Strack mentions the Urim and Thummim (Ex. xxviii.
30 ; Ley. viii. 8 ; Numb, xxvii. 21 as comp. with Ezra ii. 63 ; Neh.
vii. 65) j the year of Jubilee (Lev. xxv. 8, &e.) ; Levite cities (Numb,
xxxv. 1, &c.) ; and the law concerning spoil (Numb. xxxi. 26, &c.) ; while
Bredenkamp (u. s. p. 186) points out this inconsistency in "Wellhausen's
theory, that the ' Priest-Code' orders only the functions of the Levitea
during the wanderings in the wilderness, but makes no reference to sucb
when settled in the land of Palestine.
EECT. vn. WEIGHT OF THE ARGUMENT. 217
with the theory of its composition in the time of
Josiah. 1 But to these points we shall have to refer
at greater length in the sequel.
Let it not be said that the line of argument which
WQ have hitherto followed proceeds, in great measure,
iupon a priori considerations, which we have contended
our opponents must not bring to that criticism of the
facts on which their theory rests. For there is great dif-
ference between establishing an hypothesis on a priori.
considerations which determine our criticism of facts,
and proving by a priori considerations that such an
hypothesis is not only highly improbable but, morally
impossible. The latter method is lawful ; not so the
former. If a document, such as a will, were pro-
pounded in a court of law, it would not do to argue
that its provisions were spurious introduced by a
later falsifier because they seemed to the advocate
incredible, such as that such a person could not have
made certain charitable bequests ; or, to apply it
in the present argument, that miracles, prophetism,
direct revelation, and the like, are contrary to our
1 Among these Strack mentions: the friendly reference to Egypt,
Deut. xxiii. 8, as compared with the later views in Is. xxx. 1, &e. ;
xxxi. 1 ; Jer. ii. 18, 36 ; the friendly reference to Edom in Deut. xxiii.. 8;;
and the hostile reference to Moah and Ammon in xxiii. 4, 5 as compared
with the opposite in Jer. xlix. 17, 18 ; xlviii. 47 ; xlix. 6 ; and as regards
Edom, also Joel iv. 19 ; Obad. ; and Is. Ixiii. 1-&, Similarly, he points
to the ordinances, Deut. xx. 16-18 ; xxv. 17-19 ; xx. 10-15 ; xx. 19-20,
as unsuited to the time of Josiah, and hence incompatibly with the idea
of their invention at that period.
218 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. EEOT. vn.
ideas. In both cases direct evidence would be re-
quired. And if such direct evidence were offered
from the incompatibility of these provisions with
certain supposed indications in the document, it
would not do to brand as spurious and falsified
other indications in the same document which are in
accordance with the provisions invalidated, on the
ground that they accord with provisions which, on
the hypothesis of the advocate, are spurious. 1 This
were vicious reasoning in a circle, and evidence on
which a jury would not pronounce against a docu-
ment. On the other hand, it would be quite lawful
for the advocate who defended the document to
show, that the opposition to it proceeded on a theory
and on grounds intrinsically so improbable and so
inconsistent as to involve moral impossibility.
But the issues of this controversy are so important
that I must emphasise what, from fear of seeming to
1 In the preface to his Prolegomena (page v.) Wellhausen gives
a peculiar reply to the charge that he ' first arranges for himself the
basis on which he proceeds, by an arbitrary treatment of the text from
which he quotes, in which he introduces alterations according to
his pleasure.' To this he answers: 'I decide d, potiori, and then seek
to estimate in accordance with it every such instance.' But this
answer only involves another vicious begging of the question, and aggra-
vates instead of removing the charge brought against him. Indeed, it
seems a strange process to found charges against the Pentateuch upon
certain notices in the historical books, and then to brand as spurious
other notices which run counter to his theory. Why are these not the
potius, or, at least equally ' berechtigt ' (warranted) as the others ; and
may there not be a higher conciliation of what at first sight seems incon
eistent, without resorting to the declaration that one or the other must be
spurious ?
. vii. FURTHER SEQUENCES OF THE THEORY. 219
prejudge the question, may have been too lightly
touched. There are, no doubt, many, scholars
and general readers, who would earnestly refuse
to attach to the theory in question the absolutely
destructive sequences which seem to me logically
involved in it. But quite irrespective of this, that
Christ and the Apostles, in appealing as so often they
did to Moses and the Prophets, must, on the theory in
question, have been in such grave and fundamental
error as cannot be explained on the ground of popu-
lar modes of speaking, and seems incompatible with
the manner in which the New Testament would have
us think of them there are other and most weighty
considerations. If there really is no Mosaic legisla-
tion ; if the largest, the central, and most important
part of what professes to be such, was the invention
of the priesthood about the time of Ezra, foisted
upon Moses for a specific purpose ; if there was not
a ' Tabernacle,' in our sense of it, with its specific
institutions, nor a central place of worship, nor the
great festivals, nor a real Aaronic priesthood ; and if
the so-called historic books have been coloured and
elaborated deuteronomistically, or in that spirit ; if
they are full of spurious passages and falsifications
as, for example, in the history of Solomon ; and if
every now and then * a prophet is put in ' (eingelegt
wird) who expresses himself in the spirit of Deu-
teronomy and in the language of Jeremiah and
220 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. IECT. TO.
Ezekiel;' 1 if the 'anoynmous prophets of 1 Kings xx.
have all been afterwards inserted for the purpose of
a detailed vaticinium ex eventu, because Israelitish his-
tory is never complete without this kind of garnish'; 2
if, in short, what has gained for the history of Israel
pre-eminently the designation of sacred is mostly due
to what a later period ' has painted over the original
picture : ' then, there is in plain language only one
word to designate all this. That word is fraud.
Then, also, on the supposition that, what we had re-
garded as the sacred source of the most sacred events,
was in reality the outcome of fraud, must the Gospel
narratives and the preaching of Christ lose their his-
torical basis, and rest in large measure on deception
and delusion. For Holy Scripture, as the communi-
cation of God to man by man, does indeed contain
a distinctively human element, but that element can-
not have been one of human imposture.
In thus arguing we are not setting up any ex-
travagant theory of Inspiration, nor are we ignoring
either the repeated redactions which the Old Testa-
ment has undergone, nor yet the fact that scarcely
1 Gesch. p. 299. 2 P. 308, note 2.
8 I cannot help expressing how painfully such language affects one aa
this in the same note, which I prefer to give in the original : ' Die
reah'stisehe YergroberangdesprophetischenEinflusses tritt am plumpsten
in der Legende, 2 Reg. i. auf, wo Elias zu einem iibermenschlichen
Popanz entstellt ist.' The reader will now understand what I meant by
the difference between the language held in the Eneycl. Brit, and in the
GescMchte.
7H, EKRONEOTTS ANALOGIES. 221
any religious documents of that period can be ex-
pected to have coine down to us without bearing the
marks of redaction. We are simply proceeding on a
broad line of demarcation, visible to all men : that
between falsehood and truth. Nor is it to the point to
argue that pseudonymic literature was so common in
antiquity. Even were this the case in regard to what
we call the ' canonical ' writings, there is clearly a
great difference between the assumption of a spurious
name and the assertion of spurious facts, such as
that to have been given or ordered of God by Moses,
which was the invention of the priesthood in the time
of Ezra. ' Every literary untruth,' writes one of the
distinguished modern historians, * brought forward
for the purpose of deception, was treated in the first
centuries of the Church, by all those Fathers whose
writings have come down to us, as an abominable
sin.' The Apocrypha and the so-called Pseudepi-
graphic Writings form no part of the Canon, and
therefore cannot be quoted as instances in point.
Such books in the Old Testament as we sometimes,
though erroneously, associate with certain names,
will, on examination, be found not strictly to claim
such precise authorship. Besides, as already stated,
the Old Testament Canon has undergone repeated
investigation and discussion. 1 And we know suffi-
1 For particulars about these re-visions, and about the Canon generally,
see Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, -vol. ii. pp. 684^-690.
PROPHECY AM) HISTOET. KSOT.
cient of the discussions in those early Jewish assem-
blies which fixed the Old Testament Canon, to assure
us, that a book would not have been inserted which
was known to be false in its title still less, one that
was fraudulent in its object. And these assemblies
at least the earlier of them sat close on, if not in the
very time, that the fraud is supposed to have been
published ! Or, to go back a step, and to Old Testa-
ment times, how can we reconcile the introduction
of such a fraud as the ' invention ' of the Book of
Deuteronomy in the time of Josiah with the denun-
ciations of his contemporary Jeremiah, who inveighs
in such stern language against the Prophets that
prophesied lies in God's Name, when He had not sent
them, neither had commanded them, nor spoken unto
them, but they prophesied a false vision, a thing of
nought, the deceit of their own hearts, and so caused
the people to err ? l
We have yet another consideration to urge before
closing this prehminary part of our inquiry. If we
were to accept the views of the school of criticism
to which we have referred, much more than what has
already been stated would seem, logically to follow.
When we have relegated the so-called Levitical legisla-
tion to the time of Ezra, and resolved all that is really
distinctive in the Biblical history of Israel into legends
and myths, a blank remains which must be filled up.
1 Jer. xiv. 14 ; xxiii. 16, 81, 32.
x
EBOI. vir. ORIGINAL INSTITUTIONS OP ISRAEL. 22B
What was tlie history of Israel, and what their reli-
gious institutions ? Take away all the sacred element,
and Israel appears as only a horde of barbarians and
of slaves, lately emancipated, and not distinguish-
able from the Canaanites around. In such case their
religion was really the old indigenous nature-worship
(as they call it ' naturwtichsig '), in which Jahveh is
really Moloch and Baal ; sacrifices, often those of
human beings ; and where all the abominations of
the races in Palestine have their place. In drawing
such sequences we are not making inferences of our
own. We do not, indeed, impute them to Wellhausen,
although he designates the Ark as ' an idol;' 1 but the
sequences mentioned have been made ; they are stated
in the most pronounced manner ; and they have, in
consequence of the new theory, become present and
pressing questions, 2 which are being discussed as ' the
chief problems of ancient Israelitic religious history.' 3
Moreover, they really are the logical sequences of the
new treatment of Jewish history, although they had
been propounded before that theory was broached.
Such statements as those of Kuenen, 4 that the religion
1 SJdzsen u. Vorarb. zu d. Bibel, 1884, p. 11.
2 See the Introduction to Konig's Hawptprobl. d. altisrael. Relig.-
Gesch., 1884.
3 This, indeed, is the exact title of the little "book referred to in the
previous note, in which these questions are very ably treated, although
I must guard myself against heing understoood as accepting all the con-
cessions which the learned writer makes.
4 In his principal works, De Godsdienst van Israel, 1869. Sea
Konig, u. a.
224 PKOPHECY AND HISTORY. SECT.
of Israel was only one of the old religions neither
more nor less ; and that Judaism and Christianity
belong, indeed, to the principal religions, but that
between them and all others there is not any specific
difference point out the direction which has been
followed. And such titles of books as ' The Fire and
Blood Service of the Ancient Hebrews, the ancestral,
legal, and orthodox Worship of the Nation,' 1 'The
Human Sacrifices of the Ancient Hebrews,' 2 My-
thology and Revelation,' 3 ' Mythology among the
Hebrews ' 4 or the attempt to show that the original
sanctuary of Mecca was founded by emigrants from
the tribe of Simeon in the time of David, and that
the religion there enacted was that of Abraham 5
point out the manner in which this direction has
been followed.
I have mentioned the titles of these books, of
which many are not recent, because they most readily
present to the general reader the character of the
views which, as before stated, are undoubtedly at
present among the burning questions in connection
with the new theory of the history and religion of
ancient Israel. It is distinctly asserted, that 'the
worship of Moloch was that of Abraham, Moses,
Samuel, and David,' and that ' the idolatry inveighed
against was the primeval national religion of Israel. 1
1 Daumer, 1842. 2 Ghillany, 1842. 3 Noack, 1853.
* Goldziher, 1876. 6 Docy, 1864.
1EOT. -vir. SUGGESTIONS OP NEGATIVE CRITICISM. 225
One of the latest writers of the Wellhausen school,
Stade, 1 seems even to doubt (although in this against
Wellhausen), whether there had ever been any
Hebrew clan in Egypt, while Jahveh is represented as
a national deity by the side of other gods, and much
in the worship and religious life of the ancient
Hebrews as kindred to that in the cognate nations.
I have stated the case briefly, because, without affec-
tation, it is painful to state it at all. The curious
reader must be referred to the works of Kuenen,
Stade, and others, to learn how such views are
carried out, by different writers to different lengths, 2
and by what strange Scriptural references they are
supported.
But to what extremes a perverted ingenuity may
lead a critic, will appear from the following instance.
There is not a name among modern scholars which
deservedly stands higher, as regards Semitic learning
and literature, than that of Paul de Lagarde. Yet
this is one of the conclusions propounded, and these
are the grounds on which it has been arrived at, by
perhaps the greatest living Semitic scholar. 3 De-
riving the term Levite from the verb lavah, to cleave
1 GescJi. d. Folk. Isr., 1881, pp. 5, 113, 114, 128.
9 Thus, for example, Kuenen controverts the Oanaanitish derivation
of the name Jehovah, but he denies the Mosaic origin of the prohibition
of image-worship.
3 In the Abhandl. d. 'Konicjl. Gesellsch. d. Wissensch. zu Gottingen,
vol. xxvi. (1880), ErTdiirwng hebr. Worter, pp. 20 &c.
Q
226 PROPHECY AND HISTORY* t&m.
to another, to accompany him, Lagarde refers to
Is. xiv. 1, and Ivi. 3, in both of which this verb (ren-
dered in the A. V. 'joined to') is connected with
' strangers.' From this he infers, that the Levites
were those who, according to Exod. xii. 38 (Numb, xi.
4 ?), had 'joined ' themselves to Israel on their exodus
from Egypt the ' mixed multitude,' which Lagarde
regards as Egyptians. The latter notice he accepts
as historical, on the ground that otherwise the Jews,
the most vainglorious of men and conceited of
nations, would not have admitted that theirs was not
pure ' blue blood.' On the other hand, he pronounces
the account in Exod. ii. 1-10, which gives the Israelit-
ish genealogy of Moses, as not worthy of more serious
notice than the fable of the Persians that Alexander
the Great was the son of Darius. And Lagarde
further argues that, regarding Moses not as an
Israelite, but as an Egyptian, we can understand how
he sought and found support from the Levites, his
Egyptian compatriots [why not, if they were hi$
Israelitish tribesmen ?] ; how the Levites, as the-
better educated Egyptians, could undertake the in-
tellectual training of the Israelites [where is this,
stated ?] ; why the Levites did not appear in the
promised land as a real tribe [as if no other reasons
had been given for their scattering] ; while, lastly,
it also explained the manner in which the exodus
was referred to in Egyptian documents. And as in
later, vn. CRITICAL CONCLUSIONS. 227
ancient times the Ark of the Covenant had marched
before the Israelites, those who * accompanied ' it
were the Levites. 1
I have reproduced in detail an hypothesis so mani-
festly untenable, and supported by such flimsy reason-
ing, because the great name of Lagarde attaches to
it, and because it affords a convenient example, how
sweeping, and yet how unsatisfactory, in many
instances, is that criticism which is destructive of
the history and sacred legislation of the Old Testa-
ment. As an almost parallel instance of critical
violence we might refer to Wellhausen's treatment of
the history of Solomon in 1 Kings xi 1-1 3. 2 But
in view of the issue before us in this great contro-
1 Oomp. 1 Sam. vi. 15 ; 2 Sam. xv. 24. By the side of this we may
place the hypothesis of Mayhaum (Entvrickel. d. altisr. Priesterth. p. 11)
as to the origin of the later 'legend' ahout the descent of the priesthood
from one tribe, traced up to one ancestor. The explanation is, that
groups of families had gathered around the great religious centres in
the land. In these families the priesthood hecame hereditary. We are
asked to trace this in the family of Kohath. We know that Hebron
was a priest-city ; hut, according to Ex. vi. 18, Hebron was also a son of
Kohath. Here is the origin of the Kohathites. As for the Gershonites,
according to Ex. vi. 16, Gershon was a son of Levi ; but, according to
Judg. xviii. 30, Gershon, the son of Moses [so, after the better reading],
was the father of that Jonathan who founded a priest-family in Dan.
Thus, we are assured, the son of Moses was turned into a son of Levi, in
order to trace back all the Levites to three family groups ! And this is
serious criticism ! According to Wellhausen, the ancient tribe of Levi,
and also its territory, disappear in the time of the Judges, but the ancient
name was somehow taken up again by a priestly caste which originated
several centuries later (comp. Hoffmann, Mag. fur d. Wissensch. d. Jud.
1880, p. 156).
* Gesch. pp. 298, 299.
42
228 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. EECT.
versy, supported by such arguments, a certain degree
of warmth of language may be excused on the part
of those who hold and cherish the truth of the Old
Testament. Much more will have to be done, before
they shall have shaken from their hinges those ' ever-
lasting doors ' by which Christ the King of Glory has
entered in. As we think of the blessings of life
with which His coming has enriched the barrenness
of our earth, or of the spring of hope with which
it has gladdened the winter of our hearts, we tremble
as we realise what the hand of science, falsely so
called, might have taken from us. For if, indeed,
they were words, not of Divine truth, but of de-
lusion or of deceit, when, on that Sabbath even-
ing walk to Emmaus, ' beginning at Moses and all
the prophets, He expounded unto them in all the
Scriptures the things concerning Himself,' then may
we fold up within our hearts that pang of bitterest
disappointment : ' But we trusted that it had been
He which should have redeemed Israel.' But, thank
God, it is not so. As with a thousand chimes from
heaven, the voices of the Law and Prophets ring it
out into all the world on this Advent Sunday : 1 Eing
out the old, Eing in the new as on a thousand altars
we worship the mystery of the Incarnation, and ten
thousand hearts are filled with the joyous assurance
1 The Lecture was delivered on an Advent-Sunday, and the reference
to it is retained to explain the special expressions employed.
fcECT. vn. JtJLFILMENT Ofc THE PROMISES. 22
that their sins are forgiven. For Christ has come :
the reality of all types, the fulfilment of all promises,
the Son of David, the Saviour of the world. c For
unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given, and
the government shall be upon His shoulder ; and
His name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, the
Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, the Prince of
Peace 1 *
236
LECTURE VDI.
SOME FURTHER CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING THE COMPOSITION
AND DATE OF THE PENTATEUCH.
But neither so did tlieir witness agree together. ST. MAEK xiv. 59.
IT will, I trust, not be deemed an entirely unwar-
rantable application of these words, when we recall
them in connection with the great controversy about
the date and authorship of the Mosaic legislation.
For if the witness of critics on the other side could
be established, no reasonable appeal for the Mes-
siahship of Jesus could be made to Divine prophecy,
in a book where even human history was so men-
dacious, and where the pretensions as to the origin
of so-called Divine institutions and laws were so
fraudulent. At most and we hesitate as we express
it we would have to apologise for Jesus and His
Apostles as occupying a lower critical standpoint.
But it would seem, a strange postulate to regard Him
as the Christ, the Son of God, or His Apostles as
divinely inspired.
And yet this inference would be carried too far, if
it were supposed necessarily to imply what may be
called the old traditional standpoint, either as regards
Vrn. COMPOSITION OF THE PENTATEUCH. 231
inspiration or the authorship and composition of the
Pentateuch, with which alone we are here concerned.
The traditional view errs by excess perhaps as much,
though not with such fatal consequences, as the new
by deficiency. As regards the mode of Divine com-
munication in the Holy Scriptures, or, to narrow it :
objectively, revelation; subjectively, inspiration the
human element must be taken as fully into account
as the Divine, And specifically, in reference to the
Pentateuch or rather, the Hexateuch it is not
requisite, nor in any way implied, that it represents
one homogeneous work. As the history of our Lord
is derived from four different Gospel-sources, which,
in turn, look back upon the universally accredited
tradition of the Church and on special sources of
information, and as the Grospels view the same Divine
Life from different standpoints, and mutually supple-
ment each other so may the Pentateuch consist of
several original documents or sources, welded to-
gether by one or more redactors. And there may
even be emendations and additions glosses, if you
like to call them so 1 by redactors, revisers, or final
1 I might not, in principle, shrink from even such, a word as ' inter-
polations ' if I had only space and time to define what may be meant
by that term, with what important explanations and limitations it may
be applicable, and to what portions in the Old Testament it might be
referred. In general I must here remind the reader, that I am not
definitely stating my views of the composition of the Pentateuch, which,
even considering the space at my command, could not be done, but only
marking the delimitations of my standpoint.
232 PROPHECY AND HISTOBY. EEC*, vnt
editors. This is simply the historical aspect of the
Book as it presently exists, and with which criticism
has to busy itself. It concerns the human element in
it, but is in no wise inconsistent with, nor yet invali-
dates, the higher and Divine element in revelation
and inspiration. But what we have to insist upon is
the general truthfulness and reliableness of the Book,
alike as regards its history and legislation : that it is,
what it professes, an authentic record of the history
of Israel, and. a trustworthy account of what was
really the Mosaic legislation. This is to draw a suffi-
ciently broad line of demarcation, and to take up a
sufficiently intelligible position, with which, I believe,
all the facts of the case will be found to accord.
In order better to understand this, it is necessary
to transport ourselves, more fully than is generally
done, not only into Mosaic times, but into those
which followed the occupation of Canaan by the
Israelites. Let us first state the general position
taken up by us in this argument. It is held, that the
legislation of the Pentateuch is of Mosaic authorship
and of Divine authority ; 1 that the settlement of
1 This, so far as regards the kernel of the Mosaic legislation, is energe-
tically maintained also by Kbuig ( Offenbar. Bcgr.d. A. Test. vol. ii.p. 333),
although that writer is an adherent of the Wellhausen theory, so far as it
applies to the date of the Priest-Codex. Konig insists on the super-
natural revelation of God to Moses, on the miraculous exo.dus from
Egypt, and on the reality of the Covenant made by God with Israel on
Sinai. All this, as well as that the Prophets reflected upon a preceding
common, basis, as against Kuenen, Stade, and others (u. 8. pp. 334-336).
izfeor. -vim &ENERAL STATEMENT. 233
Israel in the land was followed by a period of
religious decay and decadence, which called for the 1
interposition of the Prophets, who pointed back to 1
the Law, and explained and applied its deeper
spiritual meaning ; that this decadence continued,
with brief interruptions, throughout the period of
the Kings, thus further calling for the continued
activity of the Prophets, and making it intelligible
how, in the utter breakdown of the Law with its
provisions, they should have pointed forward to
another Law to be written in the heart ; and that,
in the decadence of Israel and its conformity to
heathenism, instead of the transformation of heathen-
ism into a kingdom of God, through the chosen race,
the Prophets, should have set before them the coming
of the Messiah and the establishment of God's king-
dom upon earth as the great hope of Israel and of
the world.
But probably this is to state the case in too
general terms. We are apt, unconsciously to our-
selves, to transport our modern and Western ideas
into the premisses from which our conclusions as to
the earlier history of Israel are drawn. Let us re-
member that the Israelites, at the time of their
entrance into Canaan, were the wilderness-generation,
a purely nomadic race, with all of intellectual disad-
vantage indeed, infancy which this implies. During
their years of wandering they had not been brought
234 PKOPHECY AND HISTORY. BEo*.
into fructifying contact with any of the cultured
nations of antiquity. What they had inherited from
their fathers was, morally, mostly of the evil gotten in
Egypt. The intellectual culture derived from them
may, indeed, have become more generally spread in
that second generation, to which the results of that
culture, and the general ideas awakened by it, would
come as an heirloom. But, from the nomadic habits
of the people and the general circumstances of the
sojourn in the wilderness, this inherited culture would
decrease in intensity, even if it increased in extent.
And this decline, once begun, would be furthered,
rather than hindered, by the close contiguity of the
mass of the people at their halting-places, by - the
briefness of their sojourn at each of them, and by all
the circumstances attending an Eastern progress from
one station to another. Morally viewed, we have
to deal with a people semi-barbarous, and, therefore,
prone to all superstition and excess, whose newly
re-awakened religion had been tainted by Egyptian
idolatry, and deteriorated by the educational influence
of the evil example of their fathers and mothers. We
have before us an Eastern nation, sensuous and sensual
by nature, lately emancipated, with declining culture,
and which, as we have abundant evidence, is ready
at the first temptation to lapse into gross idolatry, and
to pass into the most unbridled licentiousness, which,
in turn, formed part of that idolatry which was essen-
Tin. *TFTR STATE OF ISRAEL. 235
tially a nature-worship. Licentious nature-worship
was alike physically, mentally, and morally the
natural religion of the races inhabiting those lands.
When we realise these various elements, we feel
what absolutely Divine truth and power must have
been about the religion of the Pentateuch the direct
Divine element of Revelation in it to make of such
a people and in such circumstances what, after all,
Israel was ; still more, what Israel might have become,
and what, even in its miserable failure, it has become
to mankind at large. The evidential force here is
analogous to that from the influence of the Gospel
on the Jewish and heathen world, perhaps even
stronger. And the production of such moral eifects
seems necessarily to imply direct Divine guidance,
such as appears in what are called the miraculous
portions of Israel's earlier history. Here also the
Divine wisdom if, consistently with reverence, the
expression may be employed appears in the special
religious institutions of Israel. Let it be remembered
that the special legislative, religious (and even politi-
cal) institutions of the Pentateuch bear reference to
what was then future, rather than to what was then
present to the settled, rather than the migratory,
state of the people. Many I had almost said, most
of these institutions had no place in the wilderness.
This holds specially true in regard to what constitutes
the central and really all-determining institution of
236 PKOPHECTt AND HISTORY. EECT. Tin.
the Mosaic religious legislation : sacrificial worship.
On its existence depend in great measure the appoint-
ment of one exclusive central place of worship, the
institutions connected with the priesthood, as well as
those about the great annual festivals. Take away
sacrifices, and most of the distinctive peculiarities
attaching to these three institutions cease ; suspend
them even partially, and the other three great insti-
tutions will also be partially suspended, or require
extraneous supplementation, such as we find it in the
historical books. Indeed, the religious institutions
of the Pentateuch might be likened to the wood laid
in order on the altar, and the actual observance of
the Pentateuch sacrifices as the fire significantly
sent from heaven at the consecration of the Temple
which is to set the whole in flame.
But there is not any point which, to my mind,
is better established, than that sacrifices were not
offered in connection with the Tabernacle during the
pilgrimage in the wilderness. 1 The only sacrifices
1 Comp. Amos v. 25. See here D. HoSmann in the Magaz.fur d.
Wissenscli. d. Judenth. (Jahrg. vi., 1879, pp. 7 &c.). The two occasions,
Ex. xvii. 15 and xxiv. 4, were special and exceptional, and before the setting
up of the Tabernacle. Similarly, we have the sacrifices of Jethro (Ex.
xviii. 12), in the feast of which Moses, Aaron, and the elders took part.
But all these instances bear evidence of their exceptional character. But
the contention of Wellhausen (Gesch. pp. 58 &c.), that the polemics of
Amos v. 22 &c., and of the other prophets, prove that they knew
nothing of any Mosaic and Divine institution of sacrifices as the central
part of worship, seems to me based on wrong reasoning. Their polemics
are not against sacrifices, but against sacrifices brought as a meritorious
MOT. TOT. SACRIFICIAL WORSHIP. 237
mentioned in connection with the Tabernacle are
those brought at its consecration and at that of the
priesthood, and the offering of incense. It requires
little consideration to understand that it could not
have been otherwise. Hence the name, which the
Tabernacle bears, is not 'Tabernacle of sacrifices,'
although these were really to form the central part
of its worship ; but its common designation is
* Tabernacle of Meeting ' (OM Moed 1 ) that is,
between God and Israel, the place where God would
meet with His people, as expressly stated in Ex. xxv.
22; xxix. 42, 43 ; xxx. 6, 36 ; Numb. vii. 89 ; xvii. 4.
To this designation the other ' Tabernacle of Wit-
ness,' or ' Testimony ' (as in Numb. ix. 15 ; xvii. 8 ;
xviii. 2) is subsidiary, although parallel. It fol-
lows that, during the wilderness period, the sacrificial
worship although existing initially (in the consecra-
tion services), and institutionally (in the altar of
the Tabernacle and throughout the legislation), and
also symbolically and by anticipation present (in the
burnt incense) would not stand out before the people
as a real, de facto, service ; and that, in the absence
opus operatum by an impenitent and law-breaking 1 people. It is against
the externalisation, nay, the perversion of sacrifices, that they protest. If
a Puritan inveighed, as has not unfrequeutly been done in Scotland,
against the crowds that thronged the Communion Table, and against the
pomp of solemnity by which its celebration was surrounded, it would not
follow that the Holy Communion had not been regarded as of New Testa-
ment institution.
1 Really = Ohd hivvaed (Pappenheim), misleadingly rendered in the
A. V. ' tabernacle of the congregation.'
238 PEOPHEOY AND HISTORY. MOT. mi.
of it, this bond, which held together all the other
fundamental institutions, would likewise be loosened.
For without such sacrifices the idea of one exclusive
sanctuary could scarcely have been truly carried out
(indeed, it would have no present real meaning), nor
yet that of one priesthood, nor yet that of great
central festivals. Thus we have, even at this stage
of our inquiry, to accentuate, in most emphatic lan-
guage, that, when the Israelites took possession of
the land, they were unaccustomed to a sacrificial
worship in the great central sanctuary. They did
not bring this great idea with them into the land, as
an actual reality and this, as we remember, must
have involved the loosening of all the ideas connected
with the other great institutions, organically con-
nected with sacrifices. Even the manner in which
this central sanctuary was spoken of, might further
contribute to loosen the hold which the idea itself
might have had upon the people from its Divine
institution, and from the actual existence among
them of the Tabernacle, constructed, consecrated,
and divinely honoured as it was. Such general refer-
ences as : ' in all places where I record My Name,
I will come unto Thee ; ' l and, ' the place which the
Lord your God shall choose,' so frequent in Deuter-
1 Exod. xx. 24. I accept the common reading, azkir : not that pro-
posed, tazkir. The RahMs regard the passage as prohibiting the use of
the name Jehovah, outside the Temple (Mekhilta, ed. Weiss, p. 80 5).
CBCKC. Tin. IN THE WILDEKNESS AND IN CANAAN. 239
onomy, 1 might, especially in the circumstances after
the conquest of Canaan, rather tend to decentralise
the idea of the Sanctuary. For, while directing that
sacrifice should be offered only in the place which
God had selected, it was not stated that this would
to all time be one and the same place. 2
As we recall that this non-observance of sacri-
fices in the regular services of the Tabernacle during
the wilderness period was, unquestionably, a neces-
sity imposed by the circumstances, we feel the
more deeply the wisdom by which, notwithstanding
the present impossibility of realisation, the idea of
sacrificial worship in the sanctuary was fixed in the
popular mind as the central fact in their religious
institutions. And this, together with what has
already been stated about the condition of the new
generation in Israel which entered into Canaan, will
show the need of a repetition of the Law in Deuter-
onomy but now, with modifications and special
adaptation to the new circumstances of territorial
settlement. And realising the whole condition of
things on the entrance into Canaan, we see the ab-
solute value of the two great sacraments of the Old
1 Oomp., for example, Deut. xii.
2 According to the Talmud, sacrifices on heights and by the firsthorn
were only forbidden after the erection of the Tabernacle ; the former
was again allowed till they came to Shiloh, and once more, when the
Tabernacle was at Nob and at Gibeon, but wholly prohibited when it
came to Jerusalem (Zebhach. 112 b, about the middle).
240 PROPHECY AJSTD HISTORY. IISOT. Tin;
Testament : circumcision and the Sabbath (with their
kindred domestic institutions of tithing, as God-
consecration of property, the sabbatic year, &c.).
These fixed the permanent landmarks of Israel in
the period of unsettledness and confusion which
followed to some extent, necessarily after the
death of Moses.
What has been stated in regard to the intellectual
and moral condition of the people, and the non-
existence of regular sacrificial worship in the Taber-
nacle, must now be applied to the actual state of
things in the period following. In general we must
repeat, that the religious institutions of Israel were
adapted not to what Israel then was, but rather
to what Israel was intended to become. If Israel
had developed in the right direction, if it had come
up to its institutions, then but only then would
these institutions have been possible, and have be-
come a practical reality. But it will not be denied
that, so far from rising to them, the next period
witnessed a great and growing religious decline
among the people.
It is not difficult to transport ourselves into the
circumstances of the time. The first necessity of
Israel was to fight, so to speak, for existence. They
had to obtain possession of the land ; and they
could only achieve this by continual warfare. For
they were not confronted by merely one, nor even
SECT. Tin. THE SETTLEMENT IN CANAAN. 241
by a few hostile nations. The land was divided
among a large number of independent clans, 'each
under its own king. They might, at least in part,
combine against Israel, but for all practical purposes
they were separate nations. A victory might be
decisive in one locality ; but an advance of only
a few miles would bring Israel into new territory
where the whole contest had once more to be gone
through. Accordingly, this period must have been
one of constant preoccupation, constant movement,
and constant contact with new elements. And the
absolute removal of the heathen elements from the
land would have been most difficult well nigh
impossible, since they would spring up behind the
Israelites on leaving a district, and before them
as they advanced into another territory. It was
certainly not a period when new institutions, which
had never before been actually carried into practice,
could be established. And to this must be added
the gradual spiritual decline of the people, and the
influence upon them of the surroundings of that
heathenism, towards which, as we have seen, they
were so predisposed intellectually, sensuously, and
sensually. And here we can in some measure realise
the religious importance and the necessity of such a
religious ceremony in the centre of the land as the
renewal of the covenant on Ebal and Gerizim. 1
1 Josh. viii. 30-35,
R
242 PKOPHECY AND HISTORY. ran.
We have seen that the circumstance that the
great religious institutions of Israel were not imme-
diately introduced in practice, must have tended to
weaken their hold iipon the people, to whom they
were as yet rather a theory than a reality. Indeed,
it would render their future establishment, at least,
in their integrity and purit}^ increasingly improbable.
This, even irrespective of the ever growing reli-
gious decay already referred to. Every month that
passed, and every additional contact with the heathen
world, would render the absolute prevalence of the
Mosaic institutions practically more difficult, or rather
render it increasingly likely that these institutions
would appear tinged and modified by the circum-
stances around. And when the tribes were finally
settled, they presented the appearance of so many
separate republics, not even joined together into a
Confederation, but consisting of as many independent
States. There was not any central authority nor
bond. Everywhere we mark tribal jealousies and
hostilities. Foreign invasions and wars specially
affected individual tribes, and only on rare occasions
did a sense of common danger unite even a few of
them to a common resistance. The c judges ' were
only of districts, not of the whole land. Such a
state of things could not contribute to the establish-
ment of a central Sanctuary, with exclusive sacrificial
worship, one universal priesthood, and the observ-
EBOT. TUT. HINDRANCES TO MOSAIC INSTITUTIONS. 243
ance of great national festivals in the Sanctuary.
Tt must have tended in quite the opposite direction,
and been a mighty factor in preventing the establish-
ment of the Mosaic religious legislation. Even the
strict law of inheritance, which confined the tribal
lands to members of the tribe, must, in the cir-
cumstances, have helped this disintegration of the
nation, and, with it, increased the difficulty of central
religious institutions. The other civil institutions
of the Mosaic code, such as the rule of local authori-
ties elders, and heads of families and clans would
tend in the same direction. And in this growing
religious disintegration, to which so many elements
were constantly contributing, we perceive the im-
portance indeed, the necessity of the succession
of unnamed prophets, to whom reference is made
in the historical books, and who were the pre-
decessors of the great prophets of later times. In
truth, it seems almost impossible that, without
Divine interposition, even the remembrance of
Mosaic institutions could have been preserved in
Israel.
And it did continue, although these institutions
now appeared in forms increasingly tinged by sur-
rounding circumstances, while Israel settled to still
lower and lower depths. Even if we were to concede
to our opponents that the Canaanitish term for the
national Deity, Baal, was at that period applied to
244 PEOPHECY AND HISTORY. LECT. Tin.
Jehovah, that un-Jewish rites mingled in the worship
of Israel, and un-Jewish notions appeared in the
popular expression of religion, what is this but to
own the existence of those influences for which we
have accounted on historic grounds? For it will
not be denied that these Canaanitish elements did not
exist alone, nor even as primary and prevailing, but
that by their side there was what we may call Jeho-
vahism as the leading principle only tinged and
tainted, on some occasions even overgrown, by these
foreign elements. Indeed, to contend for more than
this would be to prove too much, since, according
to our opponents, the historical boots, which contain
all these notices, have undergone a revision which
would not have left in them an entirely heathen
presentation of the religious state of Israel. And
we find a precisely parallel case in the history of
the Christian Church, which at one period was
similarly tainted and overgrown by heathen elements.
Without entering into details, it is sufficiently known
that many purely heathen practices were, so to
speak, Christianised, and that many notions of pagan
origin mingled with the religious belief and observ-
ances of the Church in early ages. Their presence
would not lead us to infer that the idea of the
Christianisation of certain tribes and countries was
an after-invention, but rather that in certain circum-
stances, and , at a certain stage of civilisation and
ECI. Tin. HINDRANCES TO MOSAIC INSTITUTIONS. 245
religious condition, the retention or introduction of
foreign elements by the side of the purer teaching of
Christianity was possible, and even natural, however
i-ncongruous the two may seem.
But we have to go further. It is evident that
tribal separation, tribal jealousies, and local interests
would contribute to the decentralisation of the Sanc-
tuary during the period before David and, similarly,
also after the secession of the ten tribes, and the con-
sequent rivalry and hostility of the two kingdoms.
We can only repeat that all this would not have hap-
pened, if Israel had lived up to its institutions, which,
in a sense, were intended to form and mould the
people into a political as well as religious unity, for
the higher purposes of tjje Theocracy, in which
politics and religion were intended to coincide. But
Israel did not rise to the level of its institutions ;
rather brought them down to its own ever lowering
standpoint, although there were individuals, let us
hope not a few, who aimed after the higher con-
formity. Besides these tribal, even communal, separ-
ations and jealousies, we have to remember, that
intercourse between different parts of the country
was more rare and difficult than we can well imagine
As we infer from many notices in the historical
books, a journey of a few miles into a neighbouring
tribe, still more into a comparatively remote part
of the country, was contemplated, and prepared for.
246 KOPHECT5r AND mSTdnl?. MOT.
with the same solemnity, as half a century ago a
removal to one of our most distant colonies, or a
continental tour.
When in all these circumstances we try to realise
the religious condition of the tribesmen before David,
the picture may seem strange to modern eyes, but
it will be true to the historical notices in the books
of Joshua, of the Judges, and of Samuel. We think
of the people as arranged in quite separated little
communities, between which the intercourse was both
rare and difficult, while tribal rivalries and jealousies
converted separation into isolation. Iij, each of these
little communities, or even districts, a sparse and sta-
tionary population tilled the soil. They had been
there for generations, and they inherited the traditions,
the prejudices, the superstitions, the habits of their
forefathers often without knowing their origin ; still
more frequently, without perceiving or even suspect-
ing their real meaning, or their possible inconsistency
with their ancestral religious principles and ordi-
nances, which in measure were to them a dim sacred
tradition. In each district the tone for good or for
evil was given by the ' great ' people, who were well-
to-do farmers or sheepmasters on their own land,
without much money, but also with few and simple
wants, which their own resources or those of the dis-
trict could supply. There were good and earnest, and
there were corrupt and idolatrous ' great ' men and
ECT. vm. REMNANTS OP THEOORATIC INSTITUTIONS. 247
women ; simple, primitive, almost idyllic districts,
like Bethlehem in the Book of Ruth ; and corrupt,
debauched places like the Gibeah of Benjamin, of
the 19th and 20th chapters of the Book of Judges.
The departure of a member of the community, or
the chance arrival of a stranger, was a great event.
Yet, despite this isolation and separation, they were
also conscious of the higher, though too often ideal
unity of Israel ; and so far under the influence of its
legislation, that on great political emergencies all
Israel gathered at the Central Sanctuary or some-
times, to a well-known chieftain ; and that the more
earnest in Israel, like the parents of Samuel, appeared
annually before the Lord, probably at the Feast of
Passover. Even these are theocratic institutions
which look back upon the Mosaic legislation. But
far more than in any single notice or reference
does this connection with theocratic institutions, and
hence with the Mosaic legislation the two being in-
separably connected, even on the theory of our oppo-
nents impress itself on the mind "by the tout ensemble
presented in the historic books. It is not one or
another fact, but everything there, which seems to
look back on the theocratic past. We instinctively feel
that, whether for good 'or evil, everything is viewed
in connection with it. Every personality, every
speech, every action, every event is presented from
the standpoint of accord with, or opposition to, the
248 PEOPHEOY AND HISTORY. EECT. Tilt.
theocratic past. The books as a whole breathe the
spirit of the Mosaic history and legislation, and lean
upon it ; and, surely, it is a sound canon that
individual passages, even though seemingly difficult,
must be interpreted by the spirit of the whole book.
And as we enter yet more fully into the cir-
cumstances of the time and people, the religious
condition of these communities, and of the families
composing them, stands out more distinctly in our
view. We can perceive how the great Central
Sanctuary, with the institutions depending upon it,
was, to most men, rather an ideal than a practical
reality. And yet the two sacraments of circumcision
and the Sabbath kept it ever before them, and became
a permanent and unsurmountable wall of separation
from that heathen world which was in such close
proximity. And here we perceive the immense
importance of the Mosaic arrangement, by which
the Levites were scattered throughout the country,
while, at the same time, they had, or might have
had, in their Levite- and priest-cities, centres which
ought to have kept alive the spirit and traditions of
their order. Even this, that the Levites were, ac-
cording to the ancient arrangement, as a tribe and
hereditarily, to be dependent for support on their
religion, would tend to keep the old faith alive. In
every district or community the Levite was the living
impersonation of it in the sight of all men. He con-
i3kH. vra, HELKHOUS INSTITUTIONS IN CANAAN. 249
nected in the present the past with the future. Thus
we find him hired as a kind of domestic chaplain
in a wealthy, religious, or superstitious household ;
while, on occasions, he emerges into view in connec-
tion with some event or undertaking. He belongs to
all Israel, and all Israel not his tribesmen must
take care of him, or avenge his wrongs. He does not
often appear, nor yet prominently, because in reality
no prominence belongs to him. ISTo doubt some of
his distinctive functions were occasionally usurped
by others, without their thinking of usurpation in
what they did. All this is quite natural. A sacrifice
might be killed by any one : it was the sprinkling of
the blood on the great altar of the Tabernacle, which
was the distinctively priestly function. Family or
communal feasts would naturally be sacrificial ; and
even if it were proved that these sacrifices were
offered by laymen, there would not necessarily have
been an infraction of the old order ; or if there was
such a generalising of the old order would not sur-
prise us, in the peculiar circumstances of the people,
the land, and the Central Sanctuary, as we have
described them ; far less would it prove the theocratic
order and Mosaic legislation to have never existed.
And if it be still urged that the Mosaic priesthood
ought to have occupied a more distinctive place in
history, we have only to picture to ourselves the
country Aaronite or Levite, as he was ; for, in the
250 PROPHECY AtfD HISTORY. MOT. Tin.
circumstances, the distinction between the two would
naturally be, to a great extent, effaced. He is
poor, expropriated, alone without possessions (unless
through marriage) in a community of more or less
well-to-do peasant-proprietors, mainly dependent for
support on hospitality and charity. He is not even
like the friar in an Italian or Spanish village, but
rather like the Greek ' pope ' in a remote district
of Boumania or of one of the Turkish provinces ; and
in the history of those countries the village ' pope '
would not form a distinguished or prominent figure.
And yet the ' pope ' has great advantages. True, he
has not any training or education to speak of, but
at least there is a religious literature, not quite in-
accessible to him. In any case, he has the service-
books and the lectionaries of his Church. But, from
the circumstances previously described, we do not
wonder at what seems implied in 2 Chron. xvii. 9,
that, in the great reformatory movement under
Jehoshaphat, the priests and Levites, deputed to
traverse the country with the princes, had to take
with them from Jerusalem the book of the Law.
This seems to convey that, even in the more religi-
ous southern kingdom of Judah, and in the time of
Jehoshaphat, this primal religious document was only
rarely found in country districts. In other words,
we have a state of general ignorance and absence of
religious literature, except in the capital. But why
vnr.
RELIGIOUS OBSERVANCES IN CANAAN. 261
this piece of gratuitous information in the Book of
Chronicles, if there was no Mosaic Law in existence,
since the compilers of Chronicles are supposed, at
least, to Kave belonged to the same school which
produced the Priest-Code ? l People do not generally
go out of their way gratuitously to inform us, that
a work, which has been palmed off as the original
and fundamental constitution of their religion, was
unknown in the country districts so long as five
hundred years ago.
And the Priests and Levites were at still further
disadvantage in the country-districts, since neither
services nor places of worship were provided for
them. We can scarcely wonder that the ancient
sacred places, 'the heights,' were reconsecrated as
centres of communal worship. One has said that these
* heights ' took the place of the synagogues of a later
period, and that they stood related to the Central
Sanctuary as the synagogues to the Temple. This is
an exceedingly practical mode of putting it ; and we
again recall that in ancient times former heathen
temples and ceremonies were similarly Christianised.
Nor yet can we wonder at the non-observance of the
great festivals, far less infer from it that they had not
1 Wellhausen's date for Chronicles three hundred years after the Exile
is manifestly impossible. Even if we regard Chronicles, Ezra, and
Neheniiah as originally one book, it could not be dated later than (with
Dillmann) about 330. And the supposed final additions (after 440) to
the Pentateuch would bring it close to that date.
252 PROPHECY AND HISTOKY. I.ECT. viii.
been Mosaically instituted. 1 We have already seen
that their observance was dependent on universal
resort to a great Central Sanctuary. And when it
was established, and the people finally settled, these
feasts had already fallen into desuetude. As regards
the Feast of Tabernacles, some indication of it may
possibly be traced in Judg. xxi. 19. And this also
would be significant. But from ver. 21 the feast seems
to have been chiefly of a local character, and its
observances remind us more of the later festivities on
the 15th of Ab (Taan. iv. 8) than of the Biblical
festival. 2 Naturally, it could only have been cele-
brated after the entrance into Canaan, when, accord-
ing to an historical notice, it seems to have been
observed in the days of Joshua the son of Nun. 3
After this, we find it again celebrated by Solornon.-
Subsequently, the times of religious reformation and
unification were too brief and troubled, the intrusion
of foreign religious elements of too long standing and
too general, and the people as a whole in too great
measure religiously denationalised, to admit of so
1 That the great festivals were connected with the seasons of the
year, had its deep symbolism, just as we connect Christmas with winter,
Easter with the bursting forth of spring, and Trinity with the ripening
of the rich harvest.
2 I cannot see any reference to the Feast of Tabernacles in 1 Sam. i.
20 (marg.). For the feast of the 15th of Ab, see The Temple and its
Services, pp. 286, 287. The same dances are stated to have been held
on the Day of Atonement.
* Neh. viii. 17.
* 2 Chron. vii. 8-10 ; comp. 2 Kings viii. 65, 66,
. vnr. RELIGIOUS OBSERVANCES IN ISRAEL. 253
radical a change, as would have been implied in a
national celebration of that feast. Indeed, we might
almost say that the Feast of Tabernacles would, in
the then state of the people, have been a moral
anachronism.
It was otherwise with the Feast of Passover, with
which we may reasonably suppose that of Weeks
to have been connected. Manifestly, this would be
the first and most natural to be re-introduced.
Accordingly we find notices of it, not only in the
time of Joshua, although, as we mark, before the
possession of the land, 1 but in that of King Heze-
kiah, 2 and of King Josiah. 3 Several points strike us
as peculiar in these last notices more especially this,
that they seem to imply a kind of observance of these
feasts in the days of the Judges, specifically in those
of Samuel, 4 as well as in the days of the kings of
Judah and of Israel. Another point seems even more
noteworthy. In 2 Chron. xxx. 21 the Passover
under Hezekiah is recorded, although, significantly,
only on the part of those children of Israel that were
in Jerusalem, 5 consisting (according to verse 25) of
worshippers from Judah, Priests and Levites, a
number of persons from the northern kingdom, and
1 Josh. v. 11. 2 2 Chron. xxx. 21.
3 2 Chron. xxxv. 18, 19 ; 2 Kings xxiii. 21, 22.
4 2 Chron. xxxv. 18.
5 2 Chron. xxx. 21 ; comp. here vii. 1-11.
254 PROPHECY AND HISTOKY. EHOK vnr.
proselytes ('strangers' both out of Judah and Israel). 1
Yet, a few chapters afterwards, the same Book of
Chronicles, in recording the Passover under Josiah,
has it, that no Passover like it had been kept since
the days of Samuel the Prophet.' 2 Similarly, while in
rJehemiah viii. 17 the Feast of Tabernacles then cele-
brated is said to have been unique at least in its
mode of observation since the days of Joshua, 2
Chronicles vii. 8, 10, which, even according to our
opponents, is kindred to Nehemiah, records the cele-
bration of this seven- days' feast with extraordinary
pomp in the time of Solomon. From every point of
view, these seemingly conflicting statements appear
at first sight incomprehensible. On the theory of
our opponents as to the date and character of these
books, it seems inexplicable that such inconsistent
statements should have been inserted, or left in the
text, and that the writers should have gratuitously
gone back a thousand years to the time of Joshua
for the Feast of Tabernacles, and to the time of
Samuel for that of the Passover, when in the one case
they might have mentioned the Solomonic observ-
ance, and in the other that of Hezekiah, and when,
on the theory under review of the introduction of
1 On the historical character of this Passover-notice, comp. Bertheau,
SucJier d. Chron. pp. 386-388 ; and Zb'ckler (ad loo.') in Lange's Bibel-
WerJt, vol. viii.
2 2 Chron. xxxv. 18.
tra. RELIGIOUS OBSERVANCES IN ISRAEL. 255
these observances, it would have been their manifest
interest to make the gap as small as possible. 1
To these difficulties we can, on our view of the
case, offer what seems to us a sufficient and a natural
solution. The passages in question do not affirm
that there had not been any celebration of the Pass-
over between Josiah and Samuel, nor of the Feast of
Tabernacles between Nehemiah and Joshua, but that
there had not been any of the same kind since those
days. We are allowed to infer that there may have
been others less national or less truly Mosaic ; we
may even speculate, that while, and when, there
was a Central Sanctuary, a certain number of the
people may have been wont to attend them, even
though the observances may have become more
local or undergone modification, perhaps owing to
the very circumstance that they were no longer kept
as general national festivals. With this agrees, not
only the notice about the annual attendance at Shiloh
of Samuel's parents, 2 but also the institution by Jero-
boam in the northern kingdom of festivals rival to
the great annual Mosaic feasts. 3 This, indeed, is only
expressly affirmed in regard to the Feast of Taber-
1 I ought here to state, that with reference to the harmony of the
different parts of the Pentateuch JE, PC, and D in regard both to
sacrifices and the festivals, I must refer the reader to the full argumen-
tation of D. Hoffmann in the Magaz. fur d. Wissensch. d. Judenth. vol.
Ti., 1879, pp. 91-114. Aa I cannot here enter into details, I must
content myself with the results of the discussion.
8 1 Sam. i. 3. 3 1 Kings xii. 27, 33.
256 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. EECT. vitl.
nacles, which Jeroboam transferred from the seventh
to the eighth month. But this notice is evidently
connected with the account of the dedication of the
house of high places, which Jeroboam combined with
his spurious Feast of Tabernacles, no doubt, in imita-
tion of what Solomon had done on a similar occasion.
Manifestly, if there had not been a more or less
common observance of that feast in Judah, Jeroboam
would not have dreaded the resort of his subjects
to the Temple, nor instituted a rival feast. Moreover,
the expression used at the setting up of the two
calves : ' Behold thy gods, Israel, which brought
thee up out of the land of Egypt,' seems to point
to the observance of a kind of Passover feast an
institution which is not likely to have been wholly
neglected, when a substitute was sought for the Feast
of Tabernacles.
Without entering into particulars, I think I am
warranted in saying that the historical notices about
the festivals are exactly as might have been expected
in the circumstances of the land and people. And
our reasoning regarding the scanty mention of the
great national festivals seems supported by the fre-
quent references to domestic and communal celebra-
tions, such as the observance of Sabbaths and JSFew
Moons, which evidently seems to have been general,
because it did not involve the necessity of any
central national attendance. And the general con-
Tin. fHIMtTlVE LEGISLATION PROBABLE. 257
elusion which we derive from a review of the actual
state of matters in Israel is to the effect that, so far
from the notices in the historical books being in-
consistent with a previous Mosaic legislation, they
are not only compatible with it, but even presuppose
its existence, and that, without such previous religious
institutions, the principal events and the leading
personages in Jewish history not only a Boaz, a
Samuel, or a David, but even a Gideon, a Saul,
or a Joab would be unintelligible.
On the other hand, the theory of our opponents
implies premisses which, on consideration, it will be
found difficult to accept. Let us still bear in mind
that Israel came out of Egypt, a land most advanced
in literature, and where religious institutions were
settled and established. It seems scarcely credible,
on purely historical grounds, that their leaders
should not have attempted to introduce something
of the same kind in Israel some religious legislation
and order ; the more so, as this would constitute a
bond of national union, and a distinctive badge of
their newly-acquired nationality, which would effect-
ually separate them from that heathen world, active
hostility to which was the primary 1 condition of their
existence. To this antecedent likelihood of a Mosaic
legislation and religious order, we have to add other
considerations in the same direction. Can we believe
that Israel was settled for centuries in their land;
s
258 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. tuox. Tin.
had developed from federal to monarchical in-
stitutions, and been brought into contact with so
many neighbouring races, and yet that up to their
4 golden age ' they had possessed only a rudimentary
code of religious legislation ; that it then suddenly
appeared developed at the period of commencing
decay, while its greater part was constructed during
the banishment of Israel, when the people were so
scattered that even the remembrance of the location
of the Ten Tribes was lost ? Assuredly, that does not
seem the fitting moment for a great part of the reli-
gious institutions to have been invented, or even for-
mulated, nor for the history of the nation to have been
recast, and most of its religious poetry composed.
We are asked to believe that so many of the priestly
and Temple arrangements, which had not existed
while Israel was in their own land, and worshipped
in their Temple, originated when Israel was scat-
tered, and had neither centre of religious unity nor
of worship ; further, that the comparatively small
minority which returned to Palestine, and to whose
lamentable condition the books of Ezra and Nehemiah
bear abundant witness, could impose a fictitious and,
in many respects, new, Mosaic law on the great ma-
jority of the people and they the more educated,
who, as we know, remained behind in the lands of
the dispersion ; and, lastly, that this new law, which
they introduced, contained, as we ,shall show, so
. vrtt. QUESTIONS BAISEft. 259
much that was impossible in the new circumstances
of the land and people, while it omitted reference to
much that we would have expected in a legislation
originating in those times.
At the risk of repetition, I must further urge one
part of this argument, leaving the other for the sequel.
Let it be kept in view, that it was only a small and
comparatively uninfhiential minority which returned
with Ezra and Nehemiah. The rest remained behind,
and rapidly spread over the face of the world. Yet
the legislation, supposed to have been then introduced,
made no provision for, took not the slightest notice
of, the wants of the great majority, not even to the
provision of synagogues, which we know to have been
among the first requirements of the ' dispersed ' nay,
even of those who returned to Palestine. Surely,
this seems so strange as to be almost incredible.
In times which called for the widest comprehension,
they concocted the narrowest conceivable legislation,
and that, in the interest of the small number of
priests who returned to Palestine ; and they not only
succeeded in introducing it as the Mosaic Law, but
in imposing it upon the educated majority, without
eliciting a single contradiction, or raising a single
question as to its authenticity until the ingenuity
of critics more than two thousand years later dis-
covered the forgery ! Was there not a single in-
dividual, among those outside the circle where this
82
260 PKOPHECY AND HISTOB. SECT,
fraud was perpetrated, wise enough to discover, or
honest enough to expose it no one, priest or layman,
of those who did not return to Palestine ? And what
had all this time become of JE, or of Deuteronomy,
which in some form must have existed, and the
provisions of which are supposed to be inconsistent
with this new Priest-Code ? Were these documents
latent, lost, or unknown, except within the small
circle of the priestly forgers ?
There are other questions connected with what
is called the Priest-Code of Ezekiel, 1 so important,
that we shall have to refer to them separately.
Meantime we would challenge evidence of the extra-
ordinary literary activity attributed to the exilian
period. We are acquainted with the literary activity
of the Prophets at the beginning of that period ; but
these Prophets had their root in the past, not in the
new development. What we know of the undoubted
post-exilian literature does not encourage belief in
any extraordinary and novel literary activity of the
exilian age, and it seems absolutely incompatible
with it, that no chronicle or record has been kept of
that period. We know actually less of the history of
the Jews during that time than of their condition
while in Egypt, and before they became a people,
insomuch that, as already stated, the very tracks of
the Ten Tribes have been lost.
1 Ezak. xl.-xlviii.
LBOI. vm. THE LINGUISTIC ARGUMENT. 261
This is the proper place to refer of necessity
quite briefly to an argument which has been ad-
vanced on the other side, although it is not easy to
understand that it should be so confidently used. It is
to the effect, that the age of the various portions in
the Pentateuch may be distinguished by linguistic
differences. This pretension, which in any case
would necessitate extreme delicacy of literary tact,
has been initially discredited by the circumstance
that scholars of admittedly equal competence have,
on linguistic grounds, declared certain parts to be of
latest date, which others have, for the same reason,
adjudged to be earliest. 1 It is, indeed, possible to
distinguish, at least with approximate reliableness,
the style of different authors, and to determine with
general accuracy whether a book belongs to one
or another period of literature, although a clever
forger of what was intended to be passed as an ancient
work (as in the case of the ' Priest-Code ') might easily
mislead critics more than two thousand years later,
and who had such scanty data by which to judge
as the small compass of Biblical literature which we
possess. In point of fact, according to Wellhausen's
theory, the forgers did so succeed, and that not only
in inducing their own contemporaries 'to accept as
archaic what was quite recent, but they similarly
1 There are not a few instances of this ; but I have here in my mind
such contentions as about Genesis, certain parts of which Fiirst ascribes
to pre-Mosaic times, "Wellhausen to the exilian period.
262 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. EBOT.
eluded the vigilance of succeeding generations, of all
the Eabbis, of all the Church, and of all critics none
of whom, till the present century, discovered, or even
suspected, the exilian composition of the Priest-Code.
And this scantiness of Biblical literature for com-
parison is admitted, at least by many on the other
\
side, 1 to make it almost impossible to determine whe-
ther an expression is old or modern, and whether
an ancient usus of expression may not have been
continued or taken up anew, or vice versd, or else
what may be due to local or educational circum-
stances. All this has of late been practically illus-
trated. By a careful examination of the language, a
competent scholar, E. Eyssel, set himself to prove 2
the high antiquity of certain portions in that part
of the Pentateuch known as the work of the Elohist.
Next, and in answer to him, another competent
scholar, F. Giesebrecht, 3 endeavoured by a fresh ex-
amination to show, that it was of much later date ; 4
1 See, for example, Dr. S. Maybaum, Entwickel. d. altisr. Priesterth.
p. 2. But I must specially refer those interested in the question to the
more exhaustive treatment of this point "by Maybaum in the Zeitschr.fiir
Volkerpsychol. u. Sprachwiss. (vol. xiv. 1883, Heft 3, pp. 193, &c."). I
regret that want of space prevents my giving even the barest notion of
his argument, which Konig (Hawptprobl. p. 16) has too lightly set aside
in a single sentence.
2 De Elohistce Pentateuchiri Sermone, 1878. Ryssel contends that,
with the exception of traces in certain sections, belonging to the second
period of the language (700-540 B.C.), all else ' ad origines litterarum
gentis Israeliticas ref'erendas esse.'
3 F. Giesebrecht in the Zeitschr.fiir d. Alte Test., 1881, pp. 177-276.
* I cannot but think that Konig has treated this subject too cursorily,
LT3CT. Tin. TWO BRANCHES OF THE ARGUMENT. 263
while, lastly, one of our own scholars, Professor
Driver, has, I think, conclusively established, 1 that
those linguistic peculiarities, on which Giesebrecht
relies, do not necessarily prove such a late date as
he contends for. From all which the . impartial ob-
server will at least conclude, that the arguments on
either side cannot be of absolute stringency, and
that no certain deduction as to the date of compo-
sition can be derived from linguistic considerations.
And this inference of common sense is remarkably
illustrated by the very interesting comparison which
Professor Stanley Leathes has made of the usus of
certain words by English writers, 2 which will be
found in a note at the end of this Lecture.
Before submitting some considerations which
seem to me incompatible with the theory of our
opponents, it may be well to take a brief retrospect
of the argument, as advanced by them. We have
already indicated that we have assigned only a very
secondary place to the supposed inconsistencies and
contradictions within the Pentateuch-legislation itself :
firstly, because they depend on an often arbitrary
separation of documents and notices, and the assign-
and that his support of the theory of Reuss on linguistic, as well as
generally on other, grounds is not satisfactory nor convincing (see the
argument in his work: Der Offenbarungsbegr. d. A. Test., 1882, pp.
322-832).
1 In the Journal of PhUol for 1882, vol. xi. pp. 201-236.
2 Stanley Leathes, Witness of the Old Testament to Clirist, p.
282, &c.
264 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. LKCT. vm.
inent to them of dates ex hypothesi, while there is no
real inconsistency between them ; and, secondly, be-
cause it would involve detailed discussions for which
this is not the place. Indeed, it seems to nie that,
without the second branch of the argument as to
the alleged inconsistencies of the Mosaic legislation-
with the condition of things, as set forth in the his-
torical books the first, which seeks to prove essen-
tial differences within the Pentateuch itself, and on
that ground to separate it into documents, widely
differing in date the most important being post-
exilian would lack any historical basis, and degene-
rate into discussions, in which critical and speculative
ingenuity on the one side might be pitted against the
same qualities on the other. In fact, however Well-
hausen may, in the Introduction to his 'History,'
strive to give prominence to the demarcation of the
various layers of which he supposes the Pentateuch
to be composed, the account which he gives of the
genesis of his own convictions regarding the character
of the Pentateuch shows, that he was mainly led by
a review of Israel's history, derived from the histo-
rical books, to that disintegration and classification
of the Pentateuch, which seemed to him to accord
with the data he had gathered from the historical
books. For, otherwise there would not seem any-
thing in the results of modern criticism inconsistent
with the supposition, stated at the outset of this Leo-
LECT. Tin.
PRIESTS AND PKOPHETS. 265
ture, of different sources or documents in the Penta-
teuch, yet all embodying Mosaic legislation, adapted to
the varying conditions of different periods, or to cir-
cumstances arising in the history of Israel especially,
when we take into account later redactions of the
book as a whole. It seems to me, therefore, that,
in an argumentative defence of the Mosaic origin of
the Pentateuch-legislation, main consideration should
be given to its relation to the notices derived from
the historical books.
This has been the object of our detailed analysis
of the condition of Israel in Canaan, with the view
of showing that, what might seem inconsistencies,
are in reality rationally accounted for by in fact,
the natural outcome of the then existing state of
things. To this it may be added, that in general
the argumentum ex silentio, even if circumstances
could not be otherwise satisfactorily explained, can
never be satisfactory or convincing. It may raise
doubts, but it cannot establish any facts. The non-
observance of a law does not prove its non-existence.
Thus, to repeat an oft-quoted instance, in Jeremiah
xvi. 6, the practice is referred to, without special
disapprobation, of cutting and making themselves
bald for the dead ; while it is expressly interdicted in
Deuteronomy (xiv. 1), which yet, according to our
opponents, existed in the time of that prophet.
On the other branch of the argument I have still
266. PROPHECY AND HISTORY. LEOT.
some considerations to offer, which shall be presented
in popular form. I venture to suggest that, if there
is one fact more clearly established than another in
the history of civilisation, it is, that the earliest
period in the life of all nations is what may be de-
signated as the theological, or else mythological ; and
that the first on the scene for guidance, rule, and
instruction, are the priests. These are in due time
followed by what may be generally classed as
teachers, or prophets. Nor is this order infringed,
either in the Old Testament, or in the later history
of Israel. There also we have first the legislation
connected with the Sanctuary, and Priests. And
these are afterwards followed by the period of the
Prophets. In turn, after the cessation of prophecy,
the Prophets give place to teachers and Kabbis. But
the theory of our opponents requires us to invert
this universal order. It asks us to believe, that in
Israel alone it was not first Priests, then Prophets ;
but first Prophets, then Priests. And the difficulty
of such inversion is all the greater since, according
to these writers, the period when the Prophets began
was one of religious barbarism in Israel, while they
were surrounded by nations, such as the Phoenicians,
Egyptians, and Assyrians, whose religious rites and in-
stitutions were not only fixed, but in a very advanced
stage of development. Moreover, the question natu-
UJCT. vnr. PROPHETIC REFERENCES TO THE LAW. 267
rally suggests itself: If the so-called Mosaic legislation
was of much later date and very different author-
ship ; and if the history in the historical books has
been painted over in the interest of later institutions,
does it not seem a strange and unaccountable blunder
to have left the picture of religious society in such
colouring as to have suggested the objection, that
the Mosaic legislation could not the,n have existed ?
We can understand that, if there had been a Mosaic
legislation, it might have been followed by a period
of such decay as is implied in the books of Joshua,
the Judges, and Samuel. But what we cannot under-
stand is, how those who introduced a legislation so
fundamentally different from, and a religious order
and ritual so discordant with, much that characterises
society in these books, and who wished to ascribe
that legislation and ritual to Moses, could have
allowed so incongruous a state of society to appear
in histories which owed to them, if not their origin,
yet their redaction.
This leads up to another point to which previous
reference has been made from a different point of
view. It has been argued that the references by the
Prophets, and in the Psalms, 1 to sacrifices, ritual
1 How this contention can "be made to agree with Wellhausen'sview
that few, perhaps none, of the Psalms date from before the Exile, it is not
for me to say.
268 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. IEOT. Tin;
observances, feasts, and such like, are antagonistic
to those, at least, in the Priest-Code. 1 And it has
been answered, that the views expressed by the Pro-
phets presuppose the existence of such institutions,
and that their polemics were directed not against
these institutions, but against their externalisation,
and the separation of their outward observance from
their inward meaning, by which their Divine purpose
was perverted to opposite results. But the argu-
ment admits of further application. Taking the Law
simply by itself, and those sayings of the Prophets
by themselves, it will be admitted that the latter
mark a progress upon the bare text of the former.
Their views of the Law, as spiritual and inward ; of
the priesthood, as one of holiness ; of circumcision, as
of the heart ; and of sacrifices, feasts, and fasts, as
not merely outward observances, unconnected with
a corresponding state of mind, mark an advance on a
former state of externalism. We can understand it,
if the Mosaic Law had already existed ; but not, if
the main part of the so-called Mosaic legislation
originated afterwards. Eor, in that case, it would
mark a retrogression from the more spiritual stand-
point of the Prophets to that Law, which yet was
evidently connected with their activity.
This connection will at least not be denied in
1 The references to the Law, both in the historical books and in the
prophets, are enumerated in App. H. at the end of this volume.
kji. vtit. EZEKlEL AND *fHEl ' PRlEST-CODE/
regard to Ezekiel. What has been called his * Priest-
Code ' * may be viewed as a symbolical and ideal
presentation of the ' New Jerusalem' the form of the
vision being determined, on the principle explained
in a former Lecture, by the peculiar modes of think-
ing and the then circumstances of the Prophet and the
people. But even so, and still more viewing it, from
the standpoint of our discussion, as a piece of legis-
lation, it bears reference to the Pentateuch order,
and more especially to that portion of it known as
the ' Priest-Code.' Historically speaking, it stands,
according to our opponents, midway between the
Jehovist and the Deuteronornist on the one hand,
and the Priest-Code on the other. Indeed, it is said
to have formed the model, and in part the kernel,
of the ' Priest-Code.' This is a decisive position to
take up, but also one which has been proved in-
defensible. No other part of the controversy has
been more exhaustively treated than this of the rela-
tion between Ezekiel and the Priest-Code, whether
Ezekiel looked back on the Priest-Code, or the Priest-
Code on Ezekiel. The contention of Wellhausen is
the latter ; but it has been shown on conclusive evi-
dence that Ezekiel looks back on the Priest-Code,
which, therefore, must have been prior to the Pro-
phet. But, in that case, we shall have to put the
Priest-Code a long way back, since, according to
1 Oh. xl.-xlviii.
270 PROPHECY AND HIStOBlf. " EEC*. tlit
OUT opponents, there is the widest difference between
it and the other documents in the Pentateuch, which
mark a very different stage and a very different date
from the Priest-Code. The detailed proof for the
assertion that Ezekiel looks back upon the Priest-
Code, and not the reverse, cannot be attempted in
this place, and the reader must be referred to where
it is specifically discussed. 1 But it would be unfair
to the argument, not at least to state the evidence
which Hoffmann has adduced in proof that Ezekiel
had known the Priest-Code. He quotes not fewer
than eighty -one passages from the Priest -Code,
which have exact verbal parallels in eighty-three
passages in Ezekiel. 2 These prove, even if we were
to make some deductions from them, that the one
document must have referred to the other. And
this is further confirmed by the peculiar use of a
particle (Khi-v 'when'), which only in the Priest-
Code in the Pentateuch, and, with few isolated ex-
ceptions, only in Ezekiel, is placed after the subject
which it determines. In evidence, that Ezekiel had
1 I must here specially refer to Hoffmann in the Magas. f. Wins,
d. Judenth., 1879, pp. 209, &c. His argument Strack states to have
never been really met. In a previous article (u. s. pp. 90, &c.) Hoffmann
discusses, among other things, the bearing of sayings in the other
prophets and in Ezekiel upon the Priest-Code, so far as regards
sacrifices and the festivals.
2 As a comparatively small numher of readers may have access to
Hoffmann's Articles, I give, in Note 2 to this Lecture, Hoffmann's com-
plete list, adducing, however, only the passages, as any reader of the
Hebrew Bible will be able to see the parallelisms for himself.
viii.
E^EKiEL AftD 0E ' PRIEST- CODE.' 27l
derived all this from the Priest-Code, and not the
reverse, Hoffmann adduces these two facts : first,
that Ezekiel employs a number of other expressions
which occur in writings that are undoubtedly older
than his prophecies, 1 while the Priest-Code contains
no other passages in which such parallelism with
other portions of Scripture occurs ; and, secondly,
that the Priest-Code has merely such parallelisms
to Ezekiel as occur only in the latter, but none of
those which Ezeldel has in common with other
writings such as Jeremiah and Deuteronomy.
We have to submit yet another consideration,
which, indeed, is not new, 2 but will, we believe, have
its due weight with those who view the subject,
not so much from the technical standpoint, as from
that of general considerations and common sense.
Let it be remembered that the ritual portion in
Ezekiel differs in many and important particulars
from the laws and arrangements of the so-called
Priest-Code. We can understand such modifica-
tions by a prophet in his vision of the future, if the
arrangements of the Priest-Code had been already
in existence ; but a later composition by priests of
a Code, professedly Mosaic, which contravened the
arrangements of an acknowledged Prophet, seems
incredible. And this the more, when we remember
1 The list of these is also given in Note 2 to this Lecture,
8 See it in Strack. u. a.
PROPHECY AND HISTORY. LEOT. Tilt
that, according to our opponents, the arrangements
of the Priest Code were also inconsistent with an
earlier legislation, which also professed to be Mosaic
so that the priests who, to speak plainly, foisted
the Priest-Code upon Moses, also made Moses con-
tradict himself as well as EzeMel. And yet it is
admitted on all hands that the 'redaction,' which
welded into one whole the various parts of which the
Pentateuch is composed, displays extraordinary skill.
Indeed, the dilemma becomes even more acute. Let
it still be borne in mind, that the difference between
the earlier legislation and that of the Priest- Code is
said, on certain points, to be very great. If so, how
are we to account for the introduction of the Priest-
Code as the Law of Moses, long after the differing
institutions of the earlier legislation had been re-
ceived as Mosaic? Or, again, if the Priest-Code
which modified the earlier legislation was the latest
production, and intended to be finally binding, how
is it that the Priest-Code was not placed after Deu-
teronomy in the Pentateuch, when they had the
arranging of it? We can understand that Deu-
teronomy may have been a second and popular
version of the earlier Law, when, in view of the
immediate entrance into the land, certain of the or-
dinances, given thirty -eight years before, had to be
modified, or, rather, adapted to the new circumstances
of the people. But we cannot imagine the publication
tsar, vm. EVIDENCE Oft MOSAIC LEGISLATION.
by the later priesthood of a code professedly Mosaic,
by the side of one more ancient, and also professedly
Mosaic, which taught differently. Why retain the
older code at all, after it had become antiquated for
so long a time ? why call it Mosaic ? why insert it
in the Pentateuch ? If the priests were able to intro-
duce such an entirely new code, in which the privi-
leges of their order and other arrangements were so
much more emphasised than in the old legislation,
why retain the latter, and insert it into the Canon ? or
why should Ezra, for example, have read it in the
hearing of all the people or, did he read it ? and
why should he have told them, that the exile had
been the punishment of their transgression of the
Mosaic ordinances, when, according to our opponents,
he was himself bringing in a new code, on many
points inconsistent with the old one ?
Such questions might easily be multiplied. But
I have still to add to the argument some considera-
tions bearing, not exclusively on the date of the Priest-
Code, but on my general position, that the Pentateuch
as a whole must be considered as embodying the
Mosaic legislation. Eor,
1. The laws and arrangements of the Pentateuch
are only adapted to an agricultural people. Trade
and commerce, except of the most primitive kind,
are not even contemplated. Not only is there an
entire absence of strictly commercial laws, but some
T
274 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. SECT. Tttt
of the institutions seem almost incompatible with
trade. Among these we only name the prohibition
of charging interest on loans or debts, and the arrange-
ment by which all real property, houses as well as
lands, reverted to their original owners after a certain
number of years, and, indeed, as I infer, could never
have passed from the possession of members of one
tribe to that of another. It is impossible to conceive
that, in a developed state of national Me, arrangements
should originate which would make the possession of
capital absolutely valueless, by depriving the capitalist
of all interest and the trader of almost any profit, or
by which, within a limited time, at longest fifty years,
every house and piece of ground would be restored
to the family of the original settlers in the land, so
that a family could not have acquired a freehold,
although it had been in their actual possession pos-
sibly for nearly two generations, 1 unless it could be
shown that their ancestry had been the original settlers
in the place. Such arrangements could not have
been introduced even after the separation of the two
Kingdoms of Israel and Judah ; they seem incredible
as proposed in the time of King Josiah, and impossible
as originating, or reproduced, 2 in or after the Exile,
1 The essential differences between this and the law of entail, under
which property may indeed "be mortgaged, hut can never pass out of the
possession of the head of a family into that of another owner, lie on the
surface.
2 This must always he kept in view in regard to what are admitted to
have been the earlier parts of the Pentateuch.
. Yin.
PRIMITIVE LAWS. 275
considering that only two of the twelve tribes returned
to Palestine.
2. The same, character of primitiveness appears
in regard to the administration of justice. In
some respects it differed materially, although not
in the sense of our opponents, from the arrange-
ments introduced at a later period by the Kings.
According to the Pentateuch, the 'elders' of a
place would act as judges. Apparently they were
the men of greatest repute, dignity, and age, and
selected by each community from its own members.
They sat in the gate, and heard and decided
causes. From this primitive tribunal the parties
in a case had not the right of appeal. This lay only
with the judges. If any cause were too hard for
them, they might refer it to the central authority in
the Sanctuary, no doubt to the High Priest and those
around him, who were the religious or national leaders
of what was intended to have been a tribal federa-
tion. When the nation became consolidated, and
monarchy was introduced, we find, indeed, the
ancient institution of the eldership continued. But
the elders now administered chiefly communal affairs.
They were the political or the religious representa-
tives of a district, who would act for the community at
large, only in cases of urgency or danger, or punish a
criminal, if his delinquency involved the community
as a whole. But the general administration of justice
i 2
276 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. zaso*. Vitt
Beems to have devolved on regular judges appointed
by the king, of which new order we have distinct
mention, if not in the time of David, 1 yet in that ol
Solomon and of Jehoshaphat. 2 But if the Pen-
tateuch legislation was posterior to that period, if it
even dated in part from the time of Josiah, it could
not have been proposed to discard the more orderly,
and go back to the primitive rude mode of administer-
ing justice by an eldership sitting at the entering of
the gate. In point of fact we find under Ezra judges
by the side of the primitive institution of ' elders.' 3
The argument which has just been urged in re-
gard to the Pentateuch arrangements about judges
would equally apply to the very primitive mode of
punishments proposed, or allowed, in the Mosaic
legislation. Some of these, such as the right of
blood-vengeance, or the executing of a rebellious son,
<-/ ' * f
could not have been introduced, or renewed, scarcely
been allowed to continue, at an advanced period in
the life of a nation. To the same class belong those
Divine punishments of 'cutting off,' so 'frequently
threatened, which we would not expect to find in a
legislative code that had originated otherwise than
that of the Pentateuch.
3. But, indeed, it is not in one direction only nor
another that we find it impossible to reconcile the
theory of a late, in part exilian, origin and date of it
1 1 Chron. xxiii. 4. * 2 Chron. i. 2 ; xix. 5. 8 Ez. x. 14.
. tin; PRIMlTlVEtfEgS OF LAWS, 277
with the character of the Pentateuch legislation. The
same conclusion is constantly forced upon us. We
find it difficult to believe that in any but the most
primitive legislation 1 an arrangement would have been
introduced, which rendered it imperative on all males
three times in the year to quit their occupations, and
undertake a pilgrimage to the Central Sanctuary,
however remote their habitations from it. In point
of fact, these three annual attendances seem never to
have been exactly observed. And we remember that
the kings of Israel, immediately after the separation
of the two kingdoms, made the inconvenience of
such an ordinance one of the grounds for setting up
a rival worship. A similar remark applies, and even
more strongly, to the laws which enjoined the offering
of a sacrifice in the Central Sanctuary, on the many
occasions in the life of every family which called for
'purification.' We can understand the introduction
of such laws in the infancy of Israel, but not at an
advanced period. Least of all can we comprehend how
they could have been enacted, or renewed, after Israel
was ' dispersed,' and the observance of such laws to
the vast majority matter of absolute impossibility.
I might prosecute this argument in reference to
the provision for the poor, and some of the ritual and
Levitical laws of the Pentateuch ; but a striking evi-
1 "Wellhausen assigns even Ex. xx.-xxiii. to a period when the people
were not only settled in the land, but had become a thoroughly agricul-
tural nation. (See S track, Real-Encykl. p. 446.)
278 PROPHECY AND HISTO&Y. tEdr. Tilt
dence, that some at least of those arrangements could
not have originated during and after the Exile, comes
to us from the later Synagogue. We know that the
traditional law was intended not only to develop and
protect, as by a fence around it, the Law of Moses,
but also to apply and supplement it. One of the
avowed reasons for this 'second law' was that, in the
state of matters which had evolved in the course of
time, and especially since the return from the Capti-
vity, new circumstances had emerged, to which the
primitive Law of Moses no longer applied, or which
it had apparently not contemplated. And there was,
as we can see, reason for this contention. It is most
curious and instructive to watch the ingenuity with
which traditionalism sought to reconcile the old with
the new, and to show that there was essential agree-
ment, even identity, between the Law of Moses and
the ordinances of the Scribes. For it was the theory
of traditionalism that all these cases had been Divinely
foreseen, although not expressed, and provided for by
oral, although not by written, legislation. One in-
stance although in regard to the Deuteronomic legis-
lation l may illustrate our meaning. The Mosaic Law
had directed the absolute extinction of debt on every
Sabbatic or Jubilee year. This, because the Mosaic
legislation recognised not the ordinary commercial
relations of debtor and creditor, but treated the bor-
1 For the later Eabbiuic modifications of the ' Priest-Code," see App. IL
; titi. 1ATE& fcAMNlC MODIFICATIONS. 279
rower as one who in his need had received charitable
assistance from his richer brother. The Kabbinic Code
sought to alleviate the inconvenience of this primitive
arrangement by ruling that the remission of debt was
to take place, not at the beginning, but only on the
last day of the seventh year. And it added this
curiously characteristic provision, that while the
creditor intimated to the debtor the remission, he
might at the same time hold open his hand for the
receipt of payment. 1 But even so it was found that
all needful business transactions were so hindered,
that the great Hillel introduced what in Eabbinic
Law is called the Prosbul (77/305 fiovXfj, before the
Council), which was a document, duly attested, bearing
these words : I, A B, hereby declare before you,
the Judges of C, that I shall have the right to claim
at any time payment of whatever debt may be due
to me by D? This curious provision, dating nearly
half a century before our era, may help to show how
impossible it would have been to originate at any later
period so primitive a legislation as that of the Penta-
teuch. Indeed, as previously stated, even the Deutero-
nomic legislation, introduced just before the entry into
Canaan, seems already to mark a widening and adap-
tation of the earlier code. And we may reasonably
assume that, if Israel had been faithful to its mission,
and developed in accordance with its institutions,
1 Shel). x. 8, and the Jer. Talm. Sheb. x. 3, 4 ; Gitt. 36a.
PROPHECY ANi) HtSTOUY. tec*, vnt.
the central authority at the Sanctuary, whether the
priesthood or the Prophets, would have been able to
adapt the primitive legislation to the growing wants
of the people.
To these considerations of what we would not
have expected to find in the Pentateuch, if its legis-
lation had been other than primitive and Mosaic,
we shall, in conclusion, add a few others, indicating
what we might reasonably have expected to find, if
any considerable part of it had dated from a late, but
especially from the exilian or post-exilian, period.
1. In such a legislation the fact of the exile
could not have been wholly ignored. We cannot
conceive a complete, and minutely detailed, code of
religious arrangements, in which no provision what-
ever had been made for, not even notice taken of,
the wants of the great majority, dispersed in all
lands. We know that the institution of the Syna-
gogue originated in the necessities of the period of
the exile ; and we also know how rapidly that insti-
tution spread, as meeting the most pressing religious
requirements. Is it possible then to imagine a legis-
lation introduced at that very time, which would com-
pletely ignore the institution of the Synagogue, and
the felt need from which it sprang? Yet the greatest
critical ingenuity has failed to discover a reference
to it, either in one or another part of the Pentateuch
legislation. On the other hand, we ask ourselves
tfcoi. Tin. tATEfc ELEMENTS. 2&t
what could be the meaning, in those times, of the
Urim and Thummim, which no longer existed ; of all
the fictions about the Ark of the Covenant, which
also no longer existed ; of the laws about the Levitical
cities, about the spoil taken in war, and, as regards
the Deuteronomist. of the laws about the Ammonite
and the Moabite, which in those days could have no
application, and whose relations to Israel seem, in-
deed, in later times, to have completely changed? 1
2. A legislation originating in later times must
have embodied, if not avowedly, yet really, the re-
sults of the past development. The whole religious
history of a people cannot be effaced. Many things
will here occur as products of the past, to which we
would have expected some reference in the new
legislation. It is the primal position in the theory
of our opponents, that the Law was after the Prophets.
Yet, admittedly, there are in the Law only faint
references to what was the constant and great theme
of prophetic preaching, the Messianic hope. There
is enough to show that the thought was not absent ;
nothing, to convey what place it occupied in Jewish
thinking. Similarly, we would have expected, if not
more distinct, yet different references to royalty ; nor
can we understand how every indication of a monarchy
of such long duration, and of so significant a character
1 Oomp. 2 Ghron. xxvi. 8, and the fact that David was of Moabitish
descent.
282 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. LBOT;
as that of the Davidic line, could have been entirely
blotted out of the record.
Lastly, even our opponents contend that, during
the Babylonish captivity, the theological views of
the exiles underwent development. With certain
important reservations, we are prepared to admit the
correctness of this statement. As might be expected,
these new elements came to occupy, in the centuries
immediately following, the most prominent place in
Jewish teaching. We specially allude here to four
points. To the period of the Exile we have to trace :
the institution of the Synagogue ; the real com-
mencement of traditionalism ; the development of
certain doctrines, notably those concerning angelic
and demoniac influences ; and the wider application
of the religion of Israel to the nations of the world,
consequent on the new relation of the people to the
world-monarchies. Such development would, as we
can readily see, naturally commence during the ban-
ishment of the Jews in the Assyrian Empire. On
the other hand, the influence of these new elements
proved, in a sense, entirely transforming in the re-
ligious history of Israel. And yet no trace of fac-
tors, which so powerfully affected the nation, can
be discovered in the code of religious legislation, of
which a large part is said to have originated at, or
after, that period.
We must bring to an abrupt termination a discus-
teat, via.
KOTE 1. T?0 LECT. Vlfl. 283
sion wliicli has, perhaps, been prolonged beyond the
bounds proper in this course of Lectures. On a
review of the whole, we are the last to" deny the
ingenuity and brilliancy with which Professor Well-
hausen has applied and popularised the theory of
Eeuss and Graf. He has the merit, not only of de-
veloping, but of applying it in all directions. In
fact, he has wholly reconstructed, on the basis of
it, the history of Israel, and resolved its problems in
accordance with it. But in this very thing lies,
in our view, the fatal flaw of the theory. We do not
profess to be able to explain every difficulty that
may be urged ; nor, indeed, do we believe that, with
the materials at our command, it is possible to do so.
But with all deference for the learning and ability of
the scholars who have adopted the views of Well-
hausen, we must be allowed to express, in plain lan-
guage, our conviction that their theory lacks the one
element which is primary: it lacks a reliable historical
basis.
NOTE I. TO LECTURE VIII.
e ... It may be interesting to observe from the following in-
stances the possible diversity of language which may obtain in
works, known to be from the same author.
*"L' Allegro" is a poem of 152 lines; it contains about 450
words. " II Penseroso " is a poem of 176 lines, and contains about
578 words. "Lycidas" is a poem of 193 lines, which are longer
than those of either of the other two, most of them being heroics ;
its words are about 725.
284
PROPHECY AND HISTORY, wart, vitt.
'It is plain, therefore, that Milton must have used for "H
Penseroso" 128 words not in "I/ Allegro," and for "Lycidas" 275
not in " L' Allegro," and 147 not in " II Penseroso."
' But what is much more remarkable, is the fact that there are
only about 125 words common to "L' Allegro" and "II Pense-
roso;" only about 135 common to "Lycidas" and " L' Allegro;"
only about 140 common to "Lycidas" and " II Penseroso ;" only
about 61 common to all three.
'That is, Milton must have used for "II Penseroso " 450 words
not in "L'Allegro;" and for "Lycidas," 590 not in " L' Allegro."
He must have used for " Lycidas " some 585 words not in " II
Penseroso," and more than 660 not occurring in both together.
' Also, there must be in " L'Allegro " some 325 words not in
" II Penseroso," and 315 not in "Lycidas;" and there must be in
"II Penseroso" nearly 440 words not in "Lycidas."
' Again : Tennyson's "Lotos Eaters" contains about 590 words;
" (Enone " has about 720. Thus the latter nrust contain 130 words
not in the former ; but a comparison shows that there are only
about 230 words common to the two poems. That is, there must
be 490 words in " OEnone " which are not in the " Lotos Eaters,"
and there must be in the " Lotos Eaters " about 360 words not
occurring in " CEuone." That is, the shorter poem has 360 words
which the longer one does not contain.'
The foregoing is an estract from Professor Stanley Leathes'
book ' The Witness of the Old Testament to Christ ' (Boyle Lec-
tures for 1868), pp. 282, 283. It should be stated that Professor
Leathes uses the above analysis in defence of the unity of the
Book of Isaiah. In the present argument, however, it is not
quoted with reference to the Book of Isaiah, on which I am not
called here to express any opinion. Accordingly, the lines of
Professor Leathes, making application of the analysis to the Book
of Isaiah are omitted (marked by dots). His analysis is adduced
as a practical illustration of the position, that no stable argument
as regards a book more especially, as regards its precise date or
authorship can be derived from the use (or non-use) of words
occurring in it.
LECT. vm.
NOTE H. TO LECT.
285
NOTE II. TO LECTURE VIII.
Passages collated by Dr. D. Hoffmann to exhibit the parallelism
of expression in the Priest-Code and the prophecies of Ezekiel
(" Magazin fur die Wissenschaft des Judenthums," vol. vi., 1879,
pp. 210-213). l
PBIESI-CODE.
1. Gen. i. 21
2.
i.30
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
M
a
n
n
vi. 11
vi. 18
vii. 14
ix.2
ix. 14
xvii. 7
xvii. 23 (and in other
places)
10. Gen. xxxvi. 7 (and in other
places)
11. Ex. i. 7
12, 13, Ex. vi. 3, 6
14, 15. Ex. vi. 6, 8
16. Ex. vi. 8
vi. 7 (and in other
places)
vi.8
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
n
vii. 5
xii. 11
xii. 12
22. xii. 20
EZEKIEL.
1. Ezek.xlvii. 9
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
n
n
n
H
xxix. 5 (comp. xxxiii.
27; xxxiv. 5 ; xxxix. 4)
viii. 17 (comp. vii. 23)
xvi. 62
xvii. 23
xxxviii. 20
i. 28
xvi. 60
ii. 3 (and
places)
10. Ezek. xx. 38
in other
11. ix. 9
12. xx. 5 (comp. v. 9)
13. xx. 6
14, 15. Ezek. xx. 28, 42
16. Ezek. xx. 38 (and in other
places)
17. xi. 15 (comp. xxv. 10 ;
xxxiii. 24)
18, 19. Ezek. xiv. 9, 13 (and in
other places)
20. Ezek. xxiv. 23
21. v- 10 (and in other
places)
22. 23. Ezek. vi. 6, 14 (and in
other places)
1 "Where the same verse is adduced several times, the reference is to
different expressions in the same verse, "which have to he compared with
parallel expressions in Ezekiel, marked hy the same number. I have
compared the references, and corrected some mistakes in Hoffmann's text,
due, of course, only to slips or errors of the press. The convincing force
of this argument will he felt on comparison of the passages, and is
enhanced hy the close contiguity of so many of the parallelisms in EzeMeL
286
PKOPHEOY AND HISTOBY.
LEOT. TIH.
PKIEST-CODE.
23. Ex. xiii. 12
24. xxv. 8
25. xxvi. 3
26. 27. Ex. xxviii. 17, 18, 20
2d. Ex. xxxi. 13
29. Lev. i. 6
30. v. 15
81. x. 9
32. x. 10
xi. 44 (and in other
places)
xiii. 45
xvi. 12
xvii. 8 (and in other
places)
xvii. 13
xviii. 5
xviii. 6 (and in other
places)
xviii. 19
xix. 7
xix. 13
xix. 16
xix. 26
xix. 36
xx. 6
47. xx. 9
48. xx. 10 J
49. xx. 27 f
50. 51, 52, 53. Lev. xx. 10, 12,
14,17
54. Lev. xxi. 1-3
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
11
tt
n
n
tt
tt
n
)>
a
tt
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
xxi. 10
xxi. 14
xxii. 2
xxii. 8
xxv. 14
xxv. 36, 87
xxv. 46
xxv. 48
24. Ezek. xx. 26
25. xliii. 9
26. i. 9
27. xxviii. 13
28. xx. 12 (comp. v. 20)
29. xxiv. 6
30. xiv. 13
31. xliv. 21
32. xxii. 26 (comp. xiii. 20;
xliv. 23)
33. .. iv. 14
34. xxiv. 17
35. x. 2
36. 37. Ezek. xiv. 4, 7
38. Ezek. xxiv. 7
39. xx. 11 (comp. v. 13, 21)
40. xxiii. 10 (and in other
places)
41. xviii. 6
42. iv. 14
43. xviii. 18
44. xxii. 9
45. xxxiii. 25
46. xiv. 10
47. xiv. 8 (comp. xv. 7, and
other places)
48. xviii. 13
49. xvi. 38-40 )
50. xxiii. 45-47 |
51. 52. Ezek. xxii. 9, 11
53. Ezek. xliv. 25
64. xliv. 20
55. xliv. 22
56. xiv. 7
67, 58. Ezek. iv. 14; xliv. 31
69. Ezek. xviii. 7
60. xviii. 8 (comp. xviii.
13, 17 ; xxii. 12)
61. xxxiv. 4
62. xi. 15
LECT. TOT.
NOTE n. TO LECT.
287
PBIEST-CODE.
63. Lev. xxvi. 2
64. xxvii. 10
65. Numbs, v. 12
66. xiv. 34
67. xiv. 34 (and in other
places)
68. xiv. 30
EZEKTEL.
63. Ezek. xxiii. 38
64. xlviii. 14
65. xx. 27
66. iv. 6
67. 68. Ezek. xiv. 10 ; xliv. 10
69.
70.
71.
n
n
n
xiv. 35
xv. 21
xv. 31
72. xv. 39
73. xvi. 9
74. xviii. 4, 5
75. xviii. 13
76. xviii. 14
77. xviii. 20
78. xix. 13
79. 80. Numbs, xxvii. 14 ; Deut.
xxxii. 51
81. Numbs, xxxi. 35
82. xxxiv. 6
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
75.
76.
77
78.
79.
). Ezek. xliv. 12 (and in othel
places)
it
n
n
n
v. 13 (and in other
places)
xliv. 30
xvi. 59 (comp. xvii. 16,
18, 19)
vi. 9
xliv. 11
xl. 45, 46
xliv. 30
xliv. 29
xliv. 28
xxxvi. 25
80, 81. Ezek. xlvii. 19 ; xlviii. 28
82. Ezek. xxvii. 13
83. xlvii. 20
2. List of passages adduced by Dr. Hoffmann, showing the pas-
sages in which expressions used by Ezekiel occur in other Books of
the Old Testament :
EZEKIEL.
1, 2. Ezek. ii. 6 ; iii. 9
3. Ezek. iv. 13
4. v. 11 (and other places)
5. vi. 11
6. vi. 13
7. vii. 18
8. vii. 19
9, 10. Ezek. xi. 16, 17 (and in
other places)
11. Ezek. xiv. 3
12. xvi. 53 (and in other
places)
OTHER BIBLICAL BOOKS.
1. Jer. i. 17
2. xxiv. 9 (comp. Deut.
xxx. 1)
3. Deut. xiii. 9
4. Jer. xxiv. 10
5. Deut. xii. 2
6. Psalm Iv. 6
7. Zeph. i. 18
8. Deut. xxviii. 64
9. xxviii. 37
10. xxx. 3
288
PROPHECY AND HISTORY.
1ECT. Tin.
EZEKTEL.
13. Ezek. xvi. 60
14,15. Ezek. xviii. 2,4
16,17. xx. 6, 15
18. Ezek. xx. 33
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
80.
n
n
n
n
n
n
xxii. 7
xxii. 12
xxii. 26
xxii. 27
xxiii. 46
xxiv. 6
xxv. 16
xxvi. 13
xxviii. 25
xxx. 2, 3
xxxvi. 30
xxxvii. 23
81, 32. Ezek. xxxix. 23, 94
83. Ezek. xliv. 24
OTHER BIBLICAL BOOKS.
11. Jer. ii. 2
12. xxxi. 28, 29
IS. Deut. vi. 3 (and in other
places)
14. v. 15 (and in other
places)
15. xxvii. 16
16. xxvii. 25
17. Zeph. iii. 4
18. iii. 3
19. Deut. xxviii. 25 (comp. Jer.
xv. 4, and in othei
places)
20. Nahum iii. 1
21. Zeph. ii. 5
22. Amos v. 23
23. Deut. xxx. 3
24. Joel i. 15
25. ii. 19
26. Deut. xxix. 16
27. n xxxi. 17
28. xri. 6
289
LEOTUEE IX.
THE MESSIANIC IDEA IN THE LATER STAGES OF ISRAEL'S
HISTORY: THE APOCRYPHA AND THEIR' RELATION TO THE
PAST AND THE FUTURE.
For the children of Israel shall abide many days without a king, and with-
out a prince, and without a sacrifice, and without an image, and with-
out an ephod, and without teraphim. Afterward shall the children of
Israel return, and seek tha Lord their God, and David their king,
and shall fear the Lord and His goodness in the latter days. Eos. iii.
4, 5.
FROM the consideration of Prophecy and of its teach-
ing, and from the vindication of its place in the Old
Testament Canon, we proceed to follow the history of
the Messianic idea in Israel after the strictly prophetic
period. And as regards the condition of Israel during
one part, or the great hope set before them in the
other part, of this period, a more accurate prophetic
description could not have been given than that by
Hosea. 1
We have reached the age of the Exile. The last
notes of the old prophetic voices followed the wan-
derers into their banishment ; the last glow of the
torch which they had held aloft threw, amidst the
encircling gloom, its fitful light on the future But
1 Hosea iii, 4, 5*
290 PKOPHEOY A]$D HISTORY. EEOT. ix.
soon it was extinguished, and silence and darkness
fall upon the scene. Eor a brief time this was once
more broken and yet scarcely broken at the time
of the return of the exiles into Palestine. Broken :
for we have such prophetic utterances as those of
Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, 1 the redaction of
certain portions of the Old Testament canon, and
the beginning and groundwork of such historical,
didactic, 2 and prophetic works, as, with later addi-
tions and insertions, may have been edited at a subse-
quent period. And yet we say that the silence and
darkness were scarcely interrupted; for (1) The
whole tone and style of the post-exilian period differs
from that of the pre-exilian. A comparison of the
prophecies of Malachi, for example, with some of
those of the earlier prophets will impress us that we
are no longer in the golden age of prophetism. In
this I am not referring to their prophetic character,
nor to the inspiration of their writings. My remarks
apply to the form the human media through
which the Divine Eevelation was communicated.
And further, while I do not feel called upon here to
express an opinion as to the precise date of the
groundwork, or of the final redaction, of those his-
1 These are only mentioned as instances, and no attempt is here made
.to indicate the compass of the post-exilian Biblical prophetic writings.
2 For the same reason as that indicated in the previous note, only a
general indication of the literature is given, -without specifying the books,
or parts of books, which, I have in view. >
I.ECT. IX.
POST EXILIAN LITEKATUBE. 291
>torical, didactic, and prophetic writings to which I
.have referred, it seems to me that they must date
either from the end of the exilian or the beginning of
the post exilian period ; or else, from a much later
time the close of the Persian, and the beginning
of the Macedono-Grecian period, about the end of
the fourth century before Christ. For, from the
purely literary point of view, and thinking of their
writers, we would expect such a renewal of religious
literature only in a period of general religious re-
vival and enthusiasm, such as at the return from the
Exile ; or else "in one of rejuvenescence, such as that
which marked and followed the accession of Alex-
ander the Great that Napoleon of the ancient world,
whose conquests re-formed and transformed not only
the political, but the social and intellectual condition
.of the world. But there are, to my mind, conclusive
grounds against the later date of any integral part of
the Old Testament canon^ 1 But whether or not the
final redaction of such works as Chronicles, Ezra, and
Neheniiah not to speak of others, such as Esther,
Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes belong to the earlier
period, or to the Alexandrian, it is at least remark-
able, that the first known revival of Jewish religious
literature I mean the earliest of the Apocrypha
| dates from the period soon after Alexander the Great.
' - ' I would here mention, not only the difference in tone of the
Apocrypha, hut their, exclusion from the Canon, especially that of The
Wisdom of the Son of Sirach, not to speak of the conaewww of tradition.
292 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. user. ix.
We may here be allowed a brief digression, if
such it be, to note three, to me at least, deeply
interesting inferences. The oldest book among the
Palestinian Apocrypha is 4 The Wisdom of Jesus the
Son of Sirach' (Ecclesiasticus). This, whether, accord-
ing to my view of it, we place its composition not
its translation into Greek, which was later at the
end of the third century before Christ, or, according
to that of others, regard it as a century younger.
It is, as already stated, Palestinian. But about the
same time (somewhere about 280) we place the
beginning of the Greek (LXX) version of the Old
Testament that of the Pentateuch. This translation
would, in the nature of things, be speedily followed
by that of the other portions of the Canon, existing at
the time, and which, in the prologue to Ecclesiasticus,
are already distinguished as * the Law, and the Pro-
phets, and the other books of our fathers ' (the
Hagiographa). Such speedy further version is also
otherwise likely. We know that in the second, and,
most probably, even in the third century before
Christ, there was considerable literary activity among
the Jews of Alexandria. Not less than six names of
Jewish writers, with notices or extracts of their
works, are preserved, 1 all of them, whether historical
1 For the names of these writers, the character of their works, and
translations from them, I take leave to refer to my History of the Jewish
Nation, pp. 370-372.
toot, it THE SEPTUAGiNT AND APOCRYPHA.
or poetic, connected with religious subjects. In such
circumstances it is not credible that the translation
into Greek of the historical, poetic, and prophetic
portions of Scripture should have been neglected.
And when we turn to the Book of Sirach we find that
its language is borrowed in places, not only from
that of the Pentateuch version of the LXX, but from
their rendering of the Books of Proverbs, of Jere-
miah, and of Isaiah. 1 We might go even a step
farther, and call attention to certain peculiarities in
the Greek rendering of Sirach. 2 For the use of any
one marked peculiarity, evidently derived from the
LXX rendering, on the part of one so capable of
writing Greek as the Son of Sirach, not only implies
the existence of this LXX version, but leads up to the
supposition of its recent introduction. Now, if we
suppose the younger Sirach to have arrived in Alex-
andria some time after 247 B.C., there would remain,
roughly speaking, about half a century after the
LXX version of the Pentateuch (about 280 B.C.) for
the translation of the other parts of the Canon. And,
as before stated, the existence of a religious Jewish
literature in Alexandria about the end of the third
century before Christ seems necessarily to imply a
1 See this in Bohl, Forsch. nach e. Volkslibel, pp. 82-84. But the whole
of the section about the Septuagint is very interesting and deserves care-
ful consideration.
2 Oomp. especially Ecclus. xlviii. 18 with the LXX of Is. xxxvii. 8 ;
also Ecclus. xlviii. 24 with Is. xl. 1.
2 4 PROPHEOt ANt) HISTORY. - IEOT. il.
previous translation of the portions of the Canon then
existing. We have dwelt at such length on this point,'
not only from its intrinsic interest, but for its obvious
important bearing on questions connected with the
Old Testament Canon. We hasten to add that, about
a century after the ' Wisdom of Sirach,' the earliest
Palestinian Apocryphon, we have (somewhere about
150 B.C.) the earliest preserved Alexandrian Apocry-
phon, the Book of Wisdom. Alike the original com-
position of the Book of Sirach (between 310 and
291 B.C.) and the fact of the Alexandrian Pentateuch
version (about 280 B.C.) not to speak of later works
impress us with the conviction that they could not
have stood isolated. By this I mean, that they cannot
have been the first outburst of a religious literature
after a long period of silence. They must have been
immediately preceded in Palestine by .a revival of
religious literary activity. The most cursory reading
of Ecclesiasticus will convince that this is not a first
religious book. It expresses, so to speak, not a fresh
and primitive, but a developed religious state of a
certain character. Aphorisms of this kind are, so
to speak, the sediment, or else the precipitate^ of a
religious development. It seems therefore inherently
not unlikely, that the redaction, not the composition,
of the latest Old Testament literature may date from
the revival at the beginning of the Alexandrian
period.
tfior. if. EARLIEST APOCKYPHA. 29
I have said only the redaction, and this leads me
to my second inference. For if we compare the old-
est Palestinian Apocryphon the Book of Sirach
or the spirit that underlies the LXX version of the
Pentateuch, with what are the youngest portions of
the Old Testament, say with the prophecies of Daniel,
or, to place side by side works that are kindred,
such as The Wisdom of the Son of Sirach and the
Book of Proverbs or Ecclesiastes we instinctively
feel, that there is a great gap between them a differ-
ence not only' of degree but of kind. From this we
again argue, that the youngest Old Testament liter-
ature cannot, so far as its groundwork is concerned,
date from the period of the revival of Jewish religious
literature, although its redaction may. But in that
case even this groundwork of the youngest portions
of the Old Testament must date from the beginning
of the post-exilian period. During the interval be-
tween it and the Alexandrian period there was
nothing in the political situation to rouse intellectual
activity, nothing in the social, to encourage it*
nothing in the religious, to be reflected in it no
outstanding event, no outstanding personality, with
which to connect it. On that period rest silence and
darkness. We may call it the formative age, corre-
sponding to that of infancy and childhood in the life
of the individual, when, so to speak, the physical
basis was laid for the Hie of the nation. ,. : i -.-I
296 ttaopHECY AHi> HISTOKY.
Yet a third remark seems here in place. From
the period succeeding the return from the Exile
which, so far as regards the form of Old Testament
literature, we would designate as its silver, if not iron
age to the Alexandrian period, roughly speaking,
about a century intervened. This interval, which can
scarcely be said to have a history, in the true sense,
nor, so far as we have certain evidence, a literature of
its own, was, as just stated, the formative period of
the nation in its new circumstances. Its certain out-
come, as apparent in the next period, was something
quite different from what had preceded it in, what
may be called, Old Testament times. In religious
literature its outcome was the Apocrypha and the
Pseudepigraphic writings ; in religion and life, that
new direction which, in distinction to that of the
Old Testament, is best characterised as Judaism^
which in its full development we know as Tradi-
tionalism and Eabbinism. And yet, in, or near to, a
period, the outcome of which is admittedly so differ-
ent, a certain school of critics would have us place
a large portion of the legislation, and of the historical
and didactic, if not the prophetic writings of the
Old Testament !
But we must turn aside from the many and in-
teresting questions which here occur, and limit our
remarks to these three points : (1) What bearing
had the period beginning with the Exile on the great
tBOi.il. Dfifi fOEMATlVE PERIOD. 297
Messianic hope ? (2) What monuments of it are left
to us as its outcome, especially in Apocryphal litera-
ture? And (3) What influence did this literature
produce on the people in regard to their spiritual
training ?
1. What bearing had the period beginning with
the Exile on the great Messianic hope ? It seems a
defective, if not a false, view of it to regard the
Babylonish exile as simply a Divine punishment for
the sins, especially the idolatry, of Israel. I venture
to assert that there is nothing merely negative, or
exclusively punitive, in the Divine dealings in history,
especially in what bears on the Kingdom of God.
Every step taken is also a step in advance, even
though, in making it, something had to be put down
and crushed. It was not otherwise with the Baby-
lonian exile. Assuredly, one aspect of it was
punitive of Israel's sin. But that, by which this
punishment was effected, also brought Israel a
step nearer the goal of its world-mission. In the
first great period of its national history Israel had,
so to speak, been gathered into a religious unity by
the Law. Its watchword had been holiness, or God-
separation ; its high-point, the priesthood ; its charac-
ter, a symbolism, that ultimately bore reference to
the Messiah and His kingdom. In the second period
of its history Israel had been under special and
constant Divine teaching. Its watchword had been
PROPHECY AND
the great hope of the future, or spiritual conquest
for God; its high-point, prophetism; its charac-
ter and object,, the formation of spiritual concep-
tions, with ultimate outlook on the Messiah and His
kingdom. And if in the first period Israel was eon--
stituted with reference to its great typical object,
and, in the second, it was brought within, view-point
of the nations of the world, as indicating its spiritual
mission and goal-point it was placed in the third
and last period in actual contact with them. That
period ran to some extent parallel with the previous
one, which had begun with the establishment of
monarchy in Israel. For, the idea of the kingdom
of God could scarcely have been realised without
an historical basis in the kingdom of Israel, and the
very defects and failures of it, as well as its contests
with the kingdoms of this world, would the more
clearly point to an ideal reality, set before its view
in the grand hope of a universal kingdom of God.
But with the deportation to Babylon that stage had
not only ended, but was completed. It was now no
longer Israel within view of the kingdoms of the
world, and in sight of its object and mission ; but
Israel amidst the kingdoms of the world, where it
could best learn what was the meaning of a universal
world-kingdom of God. If Israel had been faithful
to its mission, it would have widened to embrace the
kingdoms of the world. Israel unfaithful to it, was
. IX.
RESULTS Oi* T&E EXILE. "299
merged in them, subdued by them. Yet even so, it
also fulfilled, in its punishment, its mission in dying
gave up its pearl bringing mankind a step nearer
to the truer realisation of the kingdom of God in its
world-wide bearing.
Yet here also Israel had failed. It was the be-
ginning of its last fatal failure. Not only did Israel
not understand its mission ; but it had not heart for
it. In the first of the three periods that of the Law
holiness, priesthood, and symbolism Israel had failed
through a bare externalism. In the second of the
periods that of teaching, prophetism, and the
prospect of conquest of the world for God Israel
had failed, on the one hand, through apostasy to
heathenism, and on the other, through national
pride, selfishness, and vain-glory. And in the third
and final period of completion, Israel utterly and
finally failed misunderstood the teaching of God,
and perverted its mission : failed, even in its repent-
ance of past sins, which was not godly sorrow that
needeth not to be repented of, but the sorrow of the
.world which worketh death. Israel's final apostasy
in the time of Christ began not at His appearance ;
this, was only the logical outcome of all that had
preceded. And Israel's final rejection also began not
with the subjection to Koine, still less with the
burning of the City and Temple, but with the
return from the Exile. :
300 tKOPHECY AND HISTOBY. LECT. ix.
When Israel went into Babylon, it was once more
like the going into Egypt. The* return to Palestine
was another Exodus. But, oh, how different from
the first ! That had been marked by the glowing
religion of the Old Testament ; this, by what we
know as Judaism. Israel returned from the Exile
-not as Israel, but as the Jews ; such as history has
ever since presented them. They expanded not to
the full meaning of their mission in relation to the
world ; they shrivelled, and became mummified into
the narrowest particularism, alike mental, national,
and religious. Israel was baptised in the wilderness
unto Moses to a new and promising spiritual life ;
it was ossified in the Exile to a religion of Pha-
risaism, exclusiveness, and national isolation and
pride. No wonder that new forms had to be created
for the Divine Spirit, and that no longer Palestinianisni
but Hellenism, became the great factor and connecting
link between the Kingdom of God and the kingdoms
of the world. Thus the old fig-tree withered at its
roots. The Diaspora, rather than the Palestinian
minority, became the missionaries of the world ; Hel-
lenist thought, culture, and modes of presentation,
not Pharisaism or Eabbinism, became the medium
through which the kingdoms of the world were to
be made the Kingdom of God. And so we can
in some measure understand the meaning of the
<_
Diaspora, and of that large and ever- widening circle.
. it. JUDAISM AtfD HELLENISM. 301
of Hellenist thought, as well as its mission in the
world.
2. I have spoken of Israel as emerging on the
other side the Babylonian flood, not as Israel, but
as the Jews. And of this their later literature bears
ample evidence. We have here to reckon with three
different tendencies. We notice, first, the working of
the old spirit, which in due time would appear as
traditionalism and Eabbinism. This means reaction.
Next, we have the new spirit, which in due time
would appear as Hellenism. This means renewal
and re-formation. Lastly, we have the ideal spirit,
which, grasping the great hope of the future and of
the Messianic Kingdom, would in due time appear
either as Jewish Nationalism in the great Nationalist
party (or in close connection with it) or else, as a
pure Apocalypticism. But as yet these three tend-
encies lay in great measure unseparated in the chaos
over which the spirit of the future was brooding
waiting till outward events would differentiate them.
Two centuries had passed since the return from
Babylon. At the end of them we find ourselves
suddenly in the midst of a new-born activity in
religious literature. We have suggested this, as
possibly the period of the final redaction not com-
position of some, though perhaps not of all, the
youngest portions in the Old Testament Canon.
The new literature springs forth in Palestine, but
S02 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. juax.- tx,
chiefly in Alexandria. It is debased in literary
character, chiefly imitative of the Old Testament
writings, and, as we would naturally have expected,
of the youngest portions among them, so that one
might almost infer the comparative lateness of an
Old Testament book from its imitation by one or
more of the Apocrypha. Briefly to characterise them
from this point of view : 1st (HI.) Esdras is mainly
a compilation from 2 Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehe-
miah ; 2nd (IV.) Esdras must not come into account,
as it really belongs to the Pseudepigraphic writings.
Tobit reads almost like a Judaic and apocryphal
counterpart of the story of Job, not unmixed with
others. Judith contains reminiscences of Deborah,
Jael, and even Ruth, but seems modelled on the Book
of Esther. The additions to the Book of Esther con-
nect themselves with that work. The Wisdom of
Solomon seems to me, in the conception of its ideas,
often to present a counterpart to the Book of Job
only that in the one case the philosophy is Eastern
and Jehovistic, in the other Western and Grecian.
At the same time it also presents, in many of its
leading elements, a Grecian development of the two
great Solomonic books. The Book of Sirach is con-
nected chiefly with that of Proverbs, but also with
Ecclesiastes. Baruch, together with the Epistle of
Jeremy, connect themselves with Lamentations, and
partially also with Daniel ; the Song of the Three
. K. APOCRYPHA AND THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Children^ and the Stories of Susanna, and of Bel and
the Dragon, are connected with Daniel ; the Prayer of
Manasses with Chronicles. The First Book of the
Maccabees reminds us more of Neherniah than of
Ezra. The Second Book of the Maccabees is chiefly
an epitome of a larger work by one, Jason of Gyrene.
It is Alexandrian, as 1st Maccabees is Palestinian
and Hebrew. It must be understood that our re-
marks refer to the cast and tone, not to the contents
of these books. In regard to the former, they seem
counterparts, or else continuations, of the later por-
tions of the Old Testament Canon. But, in thought
and direction, the differences between them and any
parts of the Old Testament are so numerous and
great, as to afford indirect evidence of the canonicity
of the latter. Indeed, one of the earliest Apocrypha
expressly laments the absence of Prophets and of
Inspiration. 1
The collection of Apocrypha, as we have it in
our English Version, is not only ill translated in many
parts, but ill thrown together, being arranged neither
according to country, contents, nor age. Their num-
ber is really only thirteen, and our collection both
contains what should not, and omits what should, have
a place in it. Such portions as the Song of the Three
Children, the History of Susanna, and that of the
Destruction of Bel and of the Dragon, are really only
1 1 Mace. iv. 46 ; ix. 27 ; xiv. 41.
304 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. rid.
an apocryphal addition to the Greek version of the
Book of Daniel. As regards country or perhaps
more accurately language, the Apocrypha should
be arranged into Palestinian and Alexandrian. The
former comprise the Hebrew original, of which our
present Book of Sirach is a translation, Judith, the
First Part of Baruch, 1 the First Book of Maccabees,
and, to judge by its contents, perhaps Tobit. I have
enumerated them, chiefly, in the probable order of
their composition, although considerable doubt at-
taches to the subject, especially as regards the age of
Baruch and of Tobit. But it deserves notice, and it
confirms the views previously expressed, that all these
books date after the national revival to which we
have referred : the Book of Sirach, as I believe, from
after the Alexandrian age ; the rest probably from
the Maccabean period the 1st of Maccabees from
the beginning of the first century before Christ. As
to the others, nothing certain can be predicated.
Baruch and Tobit breathe the spirit of later Judaism,
although as yet in a more free form than when tra-
ditionalism had finally laid its yoke upon the people.
With the exception of the books just mentioned,
the other Apocrypha were written in Greek. The
oldest of them seems the Book of Wisdom, which
dates about a century, or probably a .century and
1 Ch. i.-iii. 8. A very striking parallelism has been noted between
Baruch and the Pseudepigraphic Psalter of Solomon.
. ix. CHAKAC1?Eii AM) DATE OF APOCRlTPHA. B05
a half, before Christ. It implies a considerably
advanced state of intellectual life preceding it.
In truth, it forms an advanced post on the road
of that Hellenism which may generally be charac-
terised as the attempt to reconcile the Old Testament
with Greek thought. From this there was only
a further step both easy and natural : to seek to
combine what had been shown to be harmonious.
To complete this brief review of the Apocryphal
writings, it seems appropriate to group them, not
only according to country and age, but according to
their contents. The task is, however, one of extreme
difficulty. Generally speaking, they might, indeed,
be distinguished as historical (or pseudo-historical),
didactic, and pseudo-prophetic, or rather parenetic,
since their object was, under prophetic pretension,
to convey admonition or consolation, always with
marked reference to the circumstances of the time,
the condition of heathenism, and the relation of
Israel to it. This anti-heathen element is a very
marked characteristic of the Apocrypha, which,
variously applied, might serve the purposes of con-
troversy, of apologetics, of confirmation in the faith,
of proselytism, and even of Messianic anticipation.
More important still is what we gather from the
Apocrypha to have been the doctrinal views pre-
valent at the time.
A brief reference to the differences between
X
106 -. ? MOPflECY AND
them and the Old Testament may here be in place.*'
To begin with : a very marked distinction is made
between such writings and the canonical, which
are not only designated, in the Prologue to Ecclesi-
asticus, as ' the Law, the Prophets, and the other
books of the fathers,' but for which exclusively
inspiration is claimed. Quite in accordance with
this is the exceptional manner in which Biblical
writers and Biblical works are referred to, 2 or
quoted. Thus the Apocrypha themselves mark
their line of separation from the canonical books.
And this is the more noteworthy, that the Book of
Sirach is often quoted in Rabbinic writings in a
manner similar to that in which citations are made
from canonical books. The distinction in favour of
the Old Testament is fully vindicated, the more
closely we examine the teaching of the Apocrypha.
The presentation of the Divine Being is no longer
as in the Old Testament. Sometimes it is Grecian
in its form, as chiefly in the Book of Wisdom, and,
in minor degree, in some portions of Ecclesiasticus ;
in other books, as in Judith and Baruch, it is Judaic,
narrow, and nationalistic ; while in Tobit we have
almost the later Eabbinic view of the propitiation
of God by alms. Similar remarks apply to the
1 See the full and clear analysis in the Introduction to Dr. BisselTs
Comment, on the Apocrypha, pp. 43-49.
2 Comp. here Ecelus. xxiv. 23-27 ; xlviii. 24 ; xlix. 2, 4, 7, 10 ; 1 Mace,
xii. 9 ; 2 Mace. ii. 13 j 2 Mace. vi. 23 ; 1 Esdr. i. 28 ; vi. 1 ; Bar. ii. 21.
LECT.
0$ TfflEi APOCRYPHA. SOt
presentation of the doctrines of Creation and of Pro-
vidence. As regards the doctrine of Angels, the
Apocrypha have much more developed teaching,
which in the case of Tobit descends to the low level
of superstition. 1
As might be expected, both Grecianism and
Hebrewism appear even more markedly in what such
books as Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus have to tell us
of man. The pre-existence of the soul, and its fall
and degradation through its connection with the body,
are taught side by side with a reluctant and almost
solitary reference to the fall of man as presented in
the Bible, But of the doctrine of original sin, as
fully expressed in the New Testament, the Apo-
crypha, as Eabbinism, have nothing to tell us. In
regard to moral duties, the tone of the Book of
Proverbs is now absolutely secularised. A respect-
able religiosity and a sort of common-sense decency
take the place of fervour of love and entireness of
devotion. Eeward in this life, or at most either
in the Messianic world or in the life to come, are
the leading motives ; externalism of work, rather
than deep inward spiritual views, characterises the
righteousness described. By the side of this we find in
the Apocrypha of Grecian cast (Wisdom and partly
Ecclesiasticus) a classification of the virtues after
1 TV
The sneer of Noldelie (Alttest. later, p. 105) on this point seems to
me singularly unjust," as well as out of taste.
SOS PROPHECY AND ffiSTOElf. tEcr. tfc
the philosopliic model ; while the Judaic Apocrypha
(Judith and Tobit) represent on many points a low
standard, not only in the story of Judith, but gene-
rally in regard to the relation between man and God.
In Ecclesiasticus we find throughout a twofold, some-
what incompatible, direction : the Hellenistic by the
side of the Judaic. This strange eclecticism may
have been due to the original authoi of the book,
or, as seems more likely, been introduced by the
translator.
As regards the ' after death ' the characteristics of
the Grecian Apocrypha, already noted, once more
appear. Ecclesiasticus is not only less pronounced
on these subjects than some of the canonical books,
but is, to say the least, strangely silent on the " after
death." The Book of Wisdom, while acknowledging
the immortality of the soul and the judgment, so sys-
tematically ignores the resurrection of the body as
to lead to the inference of its denial. The same may
even more strongly be predicated of 1st Maccabees,
which, indeed, has been regarded as representing the
views of the Sadducees ; while 2nd Maccabees, in this
respect, markedly reproduces the views of the Phari-
sees. 1 In reference to the Messianic hope, we can
only say that its personal aspect, as regards the
Messiah, if present at all, 2 recedes behind that of
1 Comp. on this, Bisseli, u.s,
2 Possibly, Ecclus. xlvii. 11 ; more probably, xlviii. 10, 11 ; doubt-
fully, Bar. iv. 22.
IECT. ix. DOGMATICS OF THE APOCKYPHA. 809
Israelitish, national prospects. Of these, alike in the
anti-Gentile sense, 1 and in the exaltation of Israel, 2
there is the fullest anticipation.
Thus we have in the Apocrypha which, as already
stated, must be regarded as embodying the outcome
of the previous period a marked divergence, on all
main points, from the lines followed in the Canonical
Books of the Old Testament. The latter, as has
been well remarked, 3 led up to the manger of Beth-
lehem ; the Apocrypha may, as regards dogmatic
views, be considered only a kind of preface to later
Judaism.
The other peculiarities of the Apocrypha can
only be lightly touched in this place. They are
such as to interest the student, and may open up
wider questions. We mark the tone of self-consci-
ousness which Judaism assumes towards a decrepit
heathenism, and this, in face of a hostile and un-
scrupulous political majority. There is something
truly noble in this conscious superiority and defiance,
when, on the eve of the coming battle, the despised,
defeated minority speaks in the haughty language
of assured victory. It is the Old Testament spirit,
even though it be cramped in narrow, nationalistic
forms. We are here thinking of much in the Pales -
1 As in Ecclus. xxxvi. 1-10 ; xxxix. 23 ; Bar. iv. 25, 31-35.
8 As in Ecclus. xxxvi. 11-17 j Bar. iv. 22-25, 36, 37; v.; comp,
Tob. xiii. ; xiv. (passim).
Bissell, p. 48.
310 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. IJJCT. ix.
tinian Apocrypha. But this element is not wanting
in any of the other Apocrypha, although naturally
it least appears in those of Grecian tone. Other,
and minor, points are also interesting. Thus the
story of Susanna, which some writers have regarded
as most strongly anti-Sadducean, is in fundamental
contradiction with Eabbinic law. According to the
Mishnah, 1 false witnesses were to suffer the punish-
ment of death, in obedience to the Law of Moses, 2
only if an alibi could be proved against them that
they had been in another place than that where
they had sworn to have witnessed the crime. But in
the Book of Susanna the perjured elders are put to
death simply on being convicted of false witness.?
Another interesting question is as to the alterations
which, whether from misunderstanding, or in a
Grecian sense, the younger Sirach may have made
when translating into Greek the Hebrew work of his
grandfather. Of suck even a comparison with the
Syriac translation of the book gives evidence; 4 the
latter although containing many needless and jejune
1 Mace. i. 4. So in all other Talmudie references to the question.
See Bahr, Ges. it. falsche Zeugen, pp. 29 &e.
2 Deut. xix. 19, 21.
8 The 'Daniel come to judgment' of The Merchant of Venice is the
Daniel of the Book of Susanna that is, the Biblical Daniel, although at
a very early, pre-hihlical, period of his li r e.
4 Comp., for example, the form of the prayer in Eeclus,.!. 22-24, with
that in the 'Syriac version, which evidently gives the Hebrew original.
See Geiger, in the Zeitechr. d. deutsch, mwgenl. Gesellsch. vol. xii. pp.
636 &e.
ix. CRITICAL AND LITERARY QUESTIONS. 311
paraphrases having evidently been made with a
copy of the Hebrew original before the translator.
3. From these points of chiefly critical interest
we turn to the third great question which we had
proposed to ourselves : that of the spiritual influence
which this apocryphal literature exercised upon the
people. They were, indeed, Apocrypha ' Sepharim
genuzim ' hidden books, books withdrawn ;' but
we have evidence that they largely circulated among
the people. 1 And while they were really the out-
come of the development during the preceding
period, they must also have truly reflected, though
in part they may have helped to form, the spirit of
their own time. And it is the general ' spirit of
the time' (the Zeitgeist), which we encounter and
recognise throughout this literature as appear-
ing in alliance with Judaism: a s time- spirit' that
would fain believe, it could be Jewish. In the new
contact with the outer world of Grrecianism, it could
not be otherwise than that Grecian, philosophical or
philosophising, ideas should perhaps sometimes un^
consciously intrude into Jewish religious thinking.
But there they would appear not as metaphysical or
speculative, but rather as a rationalistic element. What
we call rationalism is never philosophy; it is an at-
tempt to pervade religion with the philosophy of what
. * Ecclesiasticus is often quoted in Talmudic writings ; and 1 Mace., 3
Esdr., and the additions to Esther by Joseplms.
312 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. user. U.
Is misnamed common sense. A jejune, but popularly
attractive, treatment this of the great questions of
life, which are to be reduced to a kind of arithmetical
problems, easily to be solved by well-known rules;
an attempt to turn all things in heaven and on earth
into ponderable quantities and measurable substances,
to which the common Philistine standards can be
applied in utter ignorance that the spirit had long
fled from the dead substances which are to be so
weighed and measured. This kind of philosophic
religion, or religious philosophy, strongly tinged with.
Eastern elements alike the sensuous, contemplative,
ironical, and blase view of life had in some measure
appeared in the Book of Ecclesiastes only there as
ultimately overcome by the Divine. In the Book of
Ecclesiasticus we have mostly the bare prose of all
this. Similarly, the rationalistic, or rationalising,
tendency in religion, impregnated in Alexandria with
Grecian philosophic elements, explains much in the
Book of -Wisdom, although this is by far the loftiest
of these productions, and a long way off from such
a work as the so-called Fourth Book of Maccabees.
And we have enough, and more than enough, of it
in the philosophico-religious platitudes of a Josephus.
It is this same 4 time-spirit ' in the Apocrypha
which, according to circumstances, appears in his-
torical, apologetic, or controversial form. It is an
attempt at vindication of the Old ; vindication, as
. ix. THE 'TIME-SPIRIT' IN THE APOCRYPHA. 313
regards those that are without ; vindication also, as
regards existing ideas, with which the Old has to be
conciliated, and that, whether these ideas be Grecian
or Judaic. Thus, the First Book of Maccabees, which
is really historical, is also apologetic, in its long
speeches and Jewish reasonings ; while the object of
2nd Maccabees seems partly to be eirenical, with the
view of preventing a schism between the West and
Jerusalem, and partly apologetic of the Old in its
Palestinian form, in such legends as about the hiding
of the sacred fire, and the mode in which it was
rekindled on the altar. 3rd (I.) Esdras is certainly
apologetic: the story about the intellectual contest
of the three young men, 1 in which Zerubbabel came
out victorious, being intended not only to fill up a
gap in the history, but to supply a rational motive
for the decree of Darius (1 Esdr. iv. 42 &c.). Similar
remarks apply to the apocryphal additions to the
Book of Esther. Of Ecclesiasticus and the Book of
Wisdom we have already spoken. Tobit is a hagga-
dic Midrash, conceived in the spirit of the Judaism
which was assuming a definite shape. Judith is partly
controversial, partly consolatory. Both Baruch and
the Epistle of Jeremy are parenetic, apologetic, and
strongly controversial; and so are the additions to
the Book of Daniel.
1 The common quotation, 'Magna est Yeritas, et pwevaleW V i
8 (I.) Esdr. iv. 41.
314: PBOPHECY AND HISTORY. EEOT. ix.
We cannot pursue this inquiry farther, nor yet
close it without at least stating that there was yet
another, and a very powerful, element in the spirit
of the time, which found expression in its literature.
This element was the all-engrossing anticipation of
the prophetic future, set before Israel throughout the
Old Testament, but especially in the visions of Daniel.
The literature to which it gave birth is represented
by such of the Apocalyptic or, as they are called,
Pseudepigraphic writings as have been preserved.
This must form the next subject for consideration.
For the present we only notice, that the spirit of the
Apocrypha apparently also influenced the Pseud-
epigraph a. The Messianic future portrayed in their
visions is Juclaso-national, not universalistic. And
this marks one essential difference between these
Apocalyptic visions and the inspired prophecies of
the Old Testament. We have observed the same in
the Apocrypha, only with wider application. There
the Messianic hope had quite lost its definiteness,
and been transformed into a Jewish hope. The
central figure in the picture of the kingdom is the
Jewish nation, not the Person of the Messiah.
All this, in connection with the general religious
views which, as the outcome of the past and the pre-
paration for the future development, find their ex-
pression in the Apocrypha. The religion of the Old
Testament was that of the great prophetic future;
LBCT. K. THE MESSIANIC HOPE. 315
the religion and hope of the Apocrypha are of the
Israelitish past, which vain-gloriously seeks in the
future a realisation, commensurate to its past disap-
pointment. The hope of the Old Testament centred in
the Person of the Messiah ; that of the Apocrypha,
in the nation of the Jews. It is Judaism and the
Synagogue with which we have henceforth to do. But
not thither had the finger of prophecy pointed. Not
to the Jews but to the spiritual Israel; not to the
Synagogue but to the Church, belonged the inherit-
ance of the promises and the future of the world.
316
LECTURE X.
ON THE DIFFERENT MOVEMENTS OF NATIONAL LIFE IN PALES-
TINE IN THEIR BEARING ON THE MESSIANIC IDEA ; ON THE
NATIONALIST MOVEMENT IN ITS CONNECTION WITH PSEUD-
EPIGRAPH1C LITERATURE : THE PSEUDEPIGRAPHA, AND THEIB
CHARACTER.
And now I stand here for the hope of the promise made of God
unto our fathers ; unto which promise our twelve tribes, earnestly
seeking God night and day, hope to attain. ACTS xxvi. 6.
IT were a serious mistake to infer from the post-
canonic literature, which we call the Apocrypha
the leading characteristics and contents of which
have been briefly sketched in the previous Lecture
that the Messianic idea had died out in Israel after
the close of the Old Testament Canon, or even that
it had not existed, and indeed, constituted the very
life of the nation. It is true that the Apocrypha
preserve silence about the Person of the Messiah.
But this, not because the Messianic idea was ignored,
but because it was apprehended and presented in
another form. It was now no longer the Person of
the Messiah, but the Messianic times, which engaged
the expectancy of the people. This, perhaps, partly
from want of real faith in such a Person ; partly, to
avoid what might issue in politically dangerous move-
. *. *HE MESSIANIC JEOt>S. 317
ments. In part it may also have been due to the out-
ward condition of Israel, alike in Palestine and in ' the
Dispersion.' The hope of the people may, in the
pride of self-consciousness, have perhaps rested the
more eagerly on the rapt visions of Israel's future, as
presented by the Prophets, that it stood in such felt
painful contrast to a present, which depended on
only brute material force, but could in no way be
vindicated from the Divine, or absolute, point of
view. But chiefly it also arose from this, that the
altered aspect of Messianic expectancy was in accord-
ance with the Hellenist spirit, which some of the
Apocrypha represent, and from which scarcely any
of them are wholly free. But, for all this change of
form, the Messianic hope itself burned none the less
brightly that it was concentrated on the Messianic
times, when Israel's enemies would be vanquished,
and Israel's day of glory arise and when, so far as
this was possible, Israel's blessings would be shared
by the nations, although in vassalage to the chosen
people. I have called attention to the marked anti-
heathen element in the Apocrypha. In measure,
it was also necessarily an anti-Gentile element, and
it gave its colouring to the Messianic idea. The
Messiah was no longer a Prince of peace and the
Reconciler of the world. The Messianic times were
still those of ' the kingdom 'but of one of conquest,
of the reinstatement and triumph of Israel, and of
318 HlOPHEOt AHi) ffiSTOKlr. EECT. *.
the subjection of tlie Gentile world. And the more
we consider the condition of things, the less shall we
wonder that a people which had grown unspiritual
should, in the pride of their religious superiority,
have no longer dwelt on the Messianic aspect so
constantly presented by the Prophets, and, instead
of it, accentuated that prophetic future which they
now interpreted as belonging to Israel after the flesh,
not to the world. The difference between the Mes-
sianic hope of the Old Testament and of the later
time was that between the utterances of inspired men
who spoke the message of God, and uninspired men
who spoke of it with the feelings of personal in-
jury burning in their hearts, and the thoughts of the
times dominating and moulding the expression of
their views. It was still ' the kingdom' but Judaic,
not universalistic : the beginning of that, which
was afterwards developed by Eabbinism to all its
sequences.
Thus viewed, the Messianic idea underlies all
the Apocrypha. Nay, it is found, though in highly
elevated, not materialistic, form, even in the extreme
representative of Hellenism Philo as much as in
the utterances of the most bigoted Eabbis. In their
realistic mode of viewing, and their Oriental manner
of expressing, it, the Eabbis said, that in Messianic
days the wheat would grow in Palestine to the height
of palm-trees, and that a Jerusalem would rise with
fame.*. CHANGES N THE MESSlANIO" IDEA. '319
walls of gold and precious stones, and 'in which all
manner of jewels would be strewed about for the
use of every Israelite ; that this new Jerusalem would
be wide as all Palestine, and Palestine as all the
world, while the Holy City would be the capital of
all nations. But, after all, the underlying idea al-
though in a materialistic form, suited to their stand-
point and training was the same which, not only
the Apocrypha, 1 but Philo wished, in elevated and
philosophic manner, to convey when he described
that future, in which all Israel or perhaps all
who owned Israel's Law would be suddenly con-
verted to virtue. Upon this their masters, ashamed
to hold those in bondage who were so much better
than themselves, would release them. Then would
all the banished be freed in one day, and, as by
one impulse, 'the dispersed' throughout the world
would assemble, and return to Palestine, led by a
Divine, superhuman apparition, invisible to others,
but visible to themselves. In Palestine the waste
places and the wilderness would be inhabited,
and the barren land transformed into fruitfulness. 2
And in another treatise, 3 Philo speaks of that happy
time in a manner peculiar to himself. The happier
moral condition of man would ultimately affect the
wild beasts, which, relinquishing their solitary habits,
1 Tok xiii. 16-18.
2 Philo De Execrationibus, par. 8, 9 (ed. Mangey, ii. 435, &c.).
3 De Prcemiis et Pcenis (ed. Mangey, ii 421-428).
tROPHECY AM) fflSTORY. EBOT. x.
would first become gregarious ; then, imitating the
domestic animals, gradually come to respect man
as their master, nay, become as affectionate and
cheerful as ' Maltese dogs.' This is evidently an
anticipation of the literal fulfilment of the Isaiah
prophecy about the wolf and the lamb dwelling
together. All this would react on the condition of
ftian. There would be universal peace through the
subdual of all enemies of some in supernatural
manner, anticipated in a realistic form (by divinely
Sent swarms of hornets) and extraordinary wealth,
health, and vigour would be the boon of Messianic
times. Thus, strictly viewed, there was really not.
an absolute gulf between the realism of the Eabbis
and the most advanced of philosophising Hellenists.
And, indeed, it might be argued that the Eabbis
had only intended to make use of symbolic language,
but meant no more by it than Philo although it
seems difficult to suppose that, in the expectancy of
the unlettered masses, the descriptions of the Mes-
sianic bliss would be taken otherwise than literally.
And such was the spell of the Messianic idea, such the
hold it had upon the- genius and life of the Jewish
nation, that as we have seen even so unscrupu-
lously selfish a writer as Josephus could not suppress
all reference to it and this, in works intended for
his Eoman masters.
And how could it be otherwise ? The Jew must
. $HE PERIOt) OF USE EXILE. B2l
cease to be a Jew in any other than the negative
sense of opposition to other creeds if he gives up
the Messianic hope which is the central idea of
his religion. In this aspect of it, the Messianic
application of Genesis xlix. 10 seems a priori esta-
blished and incontestable. The sceptre could not
depart from Judah, nor the staff of command from
between his feet before,, nor yet could they remain
after, the willing obedience of the nations to God.
The particular must then given place to the general ;
the national to the universal. This, and nothing
else, is of God. We have followed the history of
the great promise through its stages of inception,
presentation, and development, till it had reached
its largest circumference, when the kingdom of
God was shown to be the world-monarchy, with out-
look upon the Great Throne, the judgment of the
Ancient of Days, and the coming of the Son of
Man. Then the period of promise had run its
course, and merged into that of expectancy.
That period really commenced with the Babylonish
captivity. It seems difficult fully to realise the changes
wrought during its course. In the round numbers
of prophetic language, we call it the seventy years'
captivity. But it was both of longer and shorter
duration than this. From the deportation of the
ten tribes, after the destruction of Samaria in
721 B.C., one hundred and eighty-five years elapsed
y
PKOPHECY Attb fitSTOBtf. rasctt. t.
to the decree of Cyrus, about 536 B.C. The first
taking of Jerusalem by the Ohaldees and the de-
portation of Joiachim and of a number of the Jews
took place in 598 B.C., that is, sixty-two years before
the decree of Cyrus ; the second taking of Jerusalem,
the death of Zedekiah, and the second depor-
tation of Jews, in 588, that is, fifty-two years be-
fore the decree of Cyrus ; and, lastly, the final de-
portation of the Jews dates from the year 584 B.C.,
or forty-eight years before Cyrus. But even as
regards the longest of these periods, that of sixty-
two years, the change which Israel underwent
seems disproportionate to the time especially as we
remember "that, with the cessation of the Temple-
services, the main institutions of the Mosaic religion
had become impossible. We can only conjecture
that the exiles from Judah may have found in the
land of their captivity new religious institutions,
which had been established, or at least commenced,
by the earlier exiles under prophetic direction, and
that these institutions proved capable of adaptation
to the religious wants of the people. At the same
time the former temptations to idolatry were not only
removed by the Exile, but the new circumstances
in which Israel found themselves, the sufferings of
banishment, and the longing for their own land
and the services of their beautiful Sanctuary, which
would be kindled, together with what they wit-
x. AFTER THE EXILE.
nessed around all this would crush and wholly re
move any leaning towards that great national sin ;
which had brought on them such Divine judgment.
This course of things seems at least much more likely
than the theory that the Jews, who were deported
in a state of idolatrous apostacy, had derived from
Babylon so many entirely new elements of their
religion. If a real change, and not a revival of the
old, had taken place, we should have expected it in
another direction ; and post- exilian Judaism would
have been very different from that rigid Mono-
theism and purism which we find alike in the
Pentateuch and in the practice of those who returned
into Palestine.
But, in the nature of them, these can be only
conjectures. For silence and darkness rest upon the
period of the Exile. The bands of exiles disappear
in the vast Assyrian empire, and though we hear
echoes of the prophets' voices from the banks of
its rivers, and distant dirges of psalmody from harps
that had been hung on their willows, we know abso-
lutely nothing of the people itself. When after the
dark night morning once more breaks, we per-
ceive, as the mist gradually lifts from valley and
hillside, new forms and scenes. Only a small part
of the nation and that chiefly the poorest and
least advanced, though religiously the most earnest
has returned, and on those who have remained
T2
324 PROPHECY AND EISTOKY. raoi. &
behind, the mist has again fallen for a time. And
they who have returned seem quite other than those
who had gone into exile. Not only has every trace
of idolatry disappeared, but a fresh v and almost a for-
mative, religious activity has sprung up. The Canon
of Scripture is revised and completed ; the old insti-
tutions are adapted to the new circumstances. Yet
so far from any alteration even in the letter of the
old, it is developed to the uttermost, and enforced
with a rigour that knows no mercy. And a new
national life has also commenced not under the rule
of the house of David, to which, despite the intense-
ness of national feeling, it bore no longer any rela-
tionship. This new life fundamentally differed, in one
aspect, from that before the Exile, when, speaking
generally, religion was dominated by political con-
siderations, whereas political considerations were now
dominated by religion. That which then opened
was, if I may make the comparison, a kind of
Old Testament Puritan period, or rather a Judsean
Covenanter period : so truly does history repeat itself
in its fundamental tendencies. Those early ' Nation-
alists,' who resisted the foreigner, and ultimately
gathered around the Judsean Martel the 'hammer
of God' Judas the Maccabee, were the Chasidim,
or s pious ones.' Intensely religious, intensely Jiidsean
also, they forsook the Maccabees when the religious
element receded behind the political, even though
. x.
THE NATIONALIST MOVEMENT. 525
the latter was Judsean. And increasingly they went
into opposition to their Jewish rulers, till, at last,
forsaking or despairing of the national aspect of
their cause, they became only a religious party,
the Pharisees. But, after this religious secession,
there still remained a strictly 'Nationalist' party.
Its adherents obeyed, indeed, the religious direction
and ordinances of the Pharisees, but they refused
to be confined within the bounds of a purely
religious sect, and cherished other and wider aims.
It is true that this party afterwards, when driven
to bay, ran into wild excesses, and during the last
siege of Jerusalem into a kind of fanatical Kobes-
pierreism. Josephus, through whose representa-
tions, or rather misrepresentations, we chiefly know
them, was utterly incapable of sympathising with
their loftier ideas, and he denounced them as rob-
bers and sicarii. Still, they represented, although
in grievously perverted form, much of what was
noblest in the national and religious aspirations of
Israel. Of this there is evidence even in the
circumstance, that in the immediate family circle
of our Lord, and among His earliest followers,
there were those who had belonged to the nationalist
party. Thus to some at least, perhaps to many,
in Palestine the nationalist direction was, what Hel-
lenism afterwards became to so many in the West :
a schoolmaster unto Christ. We recall here the
B26 PKOPHECY AND HISTORY. mar. i.
name of Simon Zelotes, the Cananean, wlio evidently
had been a member of the Nationalist party ; and that
of Jude, the brother of our Lord, in so far as his
general epistle contains one, or more probably two,
quotations from that class of writings known as the
Pseudepigrapha, which seem to be, in one direction,
closely connected with the nationalist movement,
or rather with the spirit which underlay it.
To this class of religious literature, and to the
tendencies which it represents, viewed in connection
with the history of Israel, our attention must now be
directed, in the present Lecture, in only a general
manner. The Pseud epigraphic writings represent a
peculiar phase in Jewish religious thinking. They
express the Messianic hope in its intensest, as well as
its most external I had almost said, realistic form.
They differ in their direction from Pharisaism with its
worship of the letter, as issuing in Traditionalism and
Eabbinism, as widely, as from the reaction against it in
rationalising and supercilious Sadduceeism. Nor have
they anything in common with the partly mystical,
partly Parsee direction of Essenisin, which, in one
aspect of it, might almost be designated as a Judasan
Stoicism. But the element most closely kindred to
the Pseudepigraphic writings is that which is pre-
sented by the nationalist movement ; perhaps we might
rather have said, in the nationalist direction. For
its deepest underlying thought was, that Palestine was
. CHRIST AND ALL OTHER TEACHERS. 32?
the land of God, and Israel the people of God ; that
Jehovah, and Jehovah alone, was King ; that His
was the sole universal kingdom, against which those
outside Israel were in high-handed rebellion. All
else even their excesses were their inferences
from this fundamental position. It will be perceived
that this thought lies very close to that ide& which
formed the foundation of our Lord's teaching and
mission the kingdom of God ; or, to put it more
specifically, the sole Kingship of our Father in
Heaven. Only, the Nationalists of Palestine, like the
Eoundheads or the Scottish Covenanters of our own
history, would have made it an outward reality by
means of the sword, and have upheld it by the
sword. They would have hewn its way through all
opposition, and, if need were, written their own
formula of that kingdom in letters of blood on the
eternal rocks of history and in the inmost shrine of
their sanctuary. But, according to the Word of the
Lord, which, in this respect also, is significant in
regard to this movement: taking the sword, they
perished by the sword. Not so did the God-sent
Christ understand, nor yet would He so establish
the kingdom of His Father in Heaven. Christ was*
King but as meek and lowly, and as, symbolically,
making His Eoyal entry into Jerusalem riding on
an ass, the foal of an ass. In view of the opposition
of a hostile world, He also must found His kingdom
PROPHECY Aftl) HISTORY. tiSor. i.
in blood but in His own Blood, which His enemies
shed ; not in theirs, which He shed. He also
must conquer all enemies, and subdue them to His
kingdom ; yet not by outward means, but by the
moral power of the Truth, and by the constraining
influence of His Spirit, working inward and willing
submission. His kingdom was not of this world ;
therefore did His followers not fight for it. The true
kingdom of God was within: it was righteousness,
and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. Such was
the Christ, as presented in the Gospels.
We pause to mark the historical contact with
and in this, all the more, the contrast to the men
and parties of His time. In its highest aspirations,
the Nationalist movement stood perhaps nearest to the
fundamental thought of Christ's mission. Yet, as
regards the direction and expression of that thought,
it was in absolute contrast to Him. Similarly, His
teaching embraced, in its absolute reverence for, and
implicit obedience to, the Law, all that was ideally
and potentially highest in the direction of Pharisaism.
Yet it was in fundamental opposition to the false
and unspiritual direction of the Pharisees, in their
worship of the letter and bondage of externalism.
Or, to pass to the other pole wide as were the
sympathies of Christ, and absolute as was the eman-
cipation from the rule of man, and the liberty of the
individual, which He proclaimed, yet His were prin-
IEOT. x. NATIONALIST visioNs.
ciples of positive freedom in inward subjection to
God, not of mere opposition and negation, such as
found expression in the gainsaying, the indiffer-
entism, and the superciliousness of the Sadducees.
And, again, in the guardianship of the Sanctuary of
the Soul, in its consecration to God, in the avoidance
of all that defiled it, or hindered its aspirations and
communing with God, in contempt of the world and
renunciation of its attractions, Christ touched all
that was true and high in Essenism. Yet He was at
infinite distance from its foreign and heathen elements,
its mysticism, and depreciation of matter, associated
as this was with materialistic views of the soul and of
all good. His was another way to purity and God-
fellowship than theirs ; His, other views of the body
and of matter : not its contempt, but its God-conse-
cration. And as we thus view the historical Christ
the unlettered carpenter's Son from far-off Nazareth-
it is surely impossible not to recognise the transcen-
dent greatness of that contest for the ideal which He
sustained, untainted by the thoughts of His time, un-
influenced by its motives and ambitions, undeterred
by its threats and tortures pure, holy, and spiritual
And so all ages look up to the absolute light, the
infinite loneliness, the unspeakable grandeur of His
Divine Majesty.
But to the Nationalist, as we have learned to know
him, every embodiment, every outward manifestation
330 PROPHECY ANl) HISTORY. riscrr. i.
of what contravened his deepest idea and highest ideal,
was absolutely intolerable. What business had the
Roman in Palestine ; how dared the idolater profane
by his presence the sacred soil that was God's ; how
could he claim to rule the people, whose sole King
was the Jehovah of the mighty Arm and outstretched
Hand, that erst had cloven the sea, and Whose breath
would subdue nations under Him? Even to admit
it as a fact, nay, to tolerate it, was an act of un-
faithfulness to God, of deep unbelief, of apostacy. So
patriotism and religion both in abnormal forms
mingled. They whetted their daggers to the sound
of psalms, and sharpened their swords to the martial
music of prophetic utterances, which to them seemed
only denunciations and imprecations on the enemy.
And they laid them down to dream in those Apoca-
lyptic visions, which form the subject-matter of so
much in the Pseudepigraphic writings.
To be sure, these were the visions of Latter-Day
Prophets, not the deeds of the men of action. But
the Nationalists sought, in their own rough way, to
translate them into history. Yet they contained much
besides that which these men heard in them. For, in
some respect, the nationalist idea had burned deep
into the soul of the Jewish people. In one sense,
every true Jew was a Nationalist, and could not help
being such, so long as he was a Jew. Nay, it clung to
him with all the instincts of centuries of descent, and
LECT. i. THE NATIONALISTS AND THE CHUEOH.
hereditary disposition ; with all the remembrances of
his upbringing and surroundings ; and with all the
latent enthusiasm of his Eastern and Jewish nature
and that, even if he tried to shake off his Judaism.
We see it in that knotty problem, which gave every
Jew a pang of conscience : whether it was lawful to
pay tribute unto Cassar ; we hear it in the proud
answer with which they would fain have silenced
themselves as well as Christ : ' We be Abraham's
children, and have not been in bondage to any man.'
Kay, so mighty was it, that St. Paul, appealing from
argument to the irrepressible voice of the heart, could,
in a Eoman assembly and in presence of the Pro-
curator himself, appeal to that Eomanised voluptuary,
Agrippa, and his un-Jewish sister Berenice, in such
words as these concerning the great common hope :
' King Agrippa, believest thou the Scriptures ? I
know that thou believest ! '
It was this deeper appeal to the Scriptures, or
rather to the great Messianic hope contained in them,
which in these Apocalyptic Pseudepigraph a presented
an element, that found a response in many that were
quiet in Israel, and also in some measure kept before
their minds the great hope of the future, as so-called
Millenarian books do in our generation. Just as
many a one must have listened to the stern preaching
of the Puritan in his conventicle, or of the Covenanter
on the hill-side, who yet would not have sent a Eound
3S2 tROJPHECY AND HISTORY. tfcoi. .
head to battle nor a claymore to the field even
although their hearts might beat faster, and their
cheeks flush, at the tale of their deeds ; so were there
many in Israel under the shadow of its glorious
Temple, in the lonely towns of the Judssan wilderness,
and in the far-off places of Galilee to whom, these
Apocalyptic visions would bring thoughts, remem-
brances, hopes of the Messiah and the Messianic Day :
of Israel's deliverance, of God's reign, and of the con-
version of the world. And all the more dangerous
might such thoughts become from their conjunction
with Nationalist aims and deeds. Thus we can per-
ceive a new meaning in, and an absolute and press-
ing need for, the warnings contained in the last Dis-
courses of Jesus about the danger of false Christs.
And so the Nationalists, in the frenzy of their de-
spair, plunged with the one hand the dagger in the
hearts of supposed 'trimmers,' 'backsliders,' and secret
enemies of God whose very existence and presence
among them turned aside the interposition of the
Lord while they lifted the other hand on high,
appealing to, and expecting at every moment, the
visible help of the God of Israel, Who would rive
the heavens, and in some terrible catastrophe anni-
hilate the enemy in the very hour of his triumph
and pride. But mark the contrast. In the same
hour did the Disciples, who so well knew how sted-
fastly to believe and calmly to die, warned and
. CHARACTER OF THE PSEUDEPIGRAI>HA. 333
directed by Christ, withdraw from the doomed City
to the quietness and retirement of Pella. And there
and then, in the orderly course of God's trackless
Providence, was that effected which, if it had been
done immediately after the Death of Christ, would
have been a violent and dangerous disruption ; but
which was now a peaceful, natural, and necessary
separation of the Church of the New Testament from
the ancient Synagogue. And this also was of God
and is to us evidential of the Mission of His
Christ.
What has been stated will in measure explain the
object and the subject-matter of the so-called Pseud-
epigraphic writings. They take up, and further
develop in a peculiar direction, the predictions of
the Old Testament ; they present them in visions of
the future, shaped in that peculiar imagery and lan-
guage which we call Apocalyptic ; and they do so,
not as the outcome of the inferences or speculations
of their writers, but as bringing direct communica-
tions from Heaven, connected with such names as
Enoch, Moses, Isaiah, Baruch, or Solomon. This,
however, with notable exceptions ; since perhaps the
most interesting of these books is that which em-
bodies the so-called Sibylline Oracles.
This describes one aspect of these writings. An-
other, is their intensely Jewish character not merely
as setting forth, the advantages and the future bliss
334 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. LEOT. x.
of Israel, but in their references to the nations of
the world : either hortatory, we might almost call it
missionary, or else denunciatory ; sometimes scornful,
but always triumphant in tone. There are other
tendencies, and of a party character, in these writings
mostly, as it seems to me, in opposition to the
Pharisaic direction. Some of them are certainly of
Hellenist origin that is, they were the work not
only of Western Jews, but are the outcome of Hel-
lenist thought. But even those which may be re-
garded as springing from the soil of Palestine,
have not a Pharisaic cast. On the contrary, they
all breathe, more or less, the new spirit. This is
very remarkable, and further bears witness to what
has already been stated as important in the study of
the origines of Christianity : that, with all its parade
and pomp of Messianic assertion, Traditionalism
and Eabbinism had no heart for, and very little
sympathy with, the great Messianic hope of Israel.
Theirs was another and, in many respects, anta-
gonistic direction, in which the Messiah could only
bear the part of a political deliverer. Yet another
noteworthy point, of a different character, may here
be mentioned. All the canonical books of the Old
Testament have come down to us in Hebrew or
Chaldee. But, as in the case of the Apocrypha, none
of the Pseudepigraphic writings have been preserved
in that language, although some of them were no
LECT. x. PSEUDEPIGRAPHA AND THE CHURCH. 335
doubt written in the tongue of Palestine. We have
them either in the Greek, or else in Ethiopia, in
Latin, or other version. This also forms a line of
demarcation, not to be quite ignored by those who
would dispute the canonicity of some of the Old
Testament writings.
The Pseudepigraphic writings cover the period
from about 170 before, to about 90 after Christ.
Those preserved to us are eight in number : The
Book of Enoch, the Sibylline Oracles, the Psalter
of Solomon, Little Genesis, 4th Esdras (our 2nd
Esdras), the Ascension and Vision of Isaiah, the
Assumption of Moses, and the Apocalypse of Baruch.
Although, in their present form, some of them con-
tain interpolated portions of a much later date, they
are all deeply interesting and instructive. For,
first, they give us an insight into the thoughts and
expectations of the time away from Pharisaism,
Sadduceeism, and Essenism. Secondly, they pre-
sent to us the continuance of the great Messianic
hope. If certain of the Apocrypha, such as the story
of the Maccabees or of Judith, would to the old
Jewish world have been what Foxe's 'Book of
Martyrs' is to many of us, some of those visions
of Israel and of the kingdom may have been eao-erly
read in Israel as a kind of apocalyptic 'Pilgrim's
Progress.' We can imagine a Nationalist poring, with
burning cheeks, over these visions and predictions ;
336 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. LBOT. x.
or some in the far-off lands of the Dispersion dwelling
with intense delight on what presented such a blessed
contrast to all they saw, and were constrained to ex-
perience, in the heathen world around. But our
thoughts ever recur to those quiet, deeply pious ones
on Palestine's sacred soil, who may have thought
with rapt anticipation of the prophetic truths which
these works recalled, and the happy possibilities which
they suggested. We know that an Apostle quotes
from two of these writings the Book of Enoch 1 and
the Assumption of Moses. 2 And it awakens a scarcely
less deep interest to find, that such of the Pseud-
epigraphic writings as date after Christ bear evident
mark of St. Paul's influence, and this, notwithstanding
their own decided anti-Christian tendency.
But what, above all else, appeals to us, is the pic-
ture of the Messiah and of the Messianic kingdom
which these works present. To this our attention
must next be directed as also to the relation which
the Pseudepigrapha bear, on the one hand, to the
prophecies of the Old Testament, and, on the other,
to the reality, as first heralded by the Baptist, and
then fully set forth in Christ.
St. Jude, TV. 14, 15. * St. Jude, ver. 9.
337
LECTURE XI.
ANALYSIS AND CONTENTS OF THE FSEUDEPIGRAPHTC WETTINGS ;
THEIR TEACHING CONCERNING THE MESSIAH AND MESSIANIC
TIMES.
And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites
from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art thou ? .... He said, I am the.
voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make straight the way of the
Lord, as said the prophet Esaias. ST. JOHN i. 19, 23.
THESE words and, still more, the thoughts, of him
who uttered them, seern to transport us into an atmo-
sphere, different from that of the writings to which
attention has been called in the two preceding Lec-
tures. In truth, from the Apocryphal and Pseud-
epigraphic writings to John the Baptist, there is an
immense step backward, as well as forward a retro-
gression to the Old Testament : yet not merely to
rekindle the old light, but to kindle a new one by
its flame.
That this may appear more clearly, we shall have
to give a more detailed account than in the last-
Lecture of the Pseudepigraphic writings describing
their character, titles, and general contents. 1
1 I refer here only to such of the Pseudepigrapha as exist in a more
or less complete form, not to those of which we have only fragments.
338 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. LBOT. xi.
1. There cannot, I fear, be any doubt but that
many works belonging to this class of literature have
perished. It is natural to suppose that writings of
this kind would exercise a peculiar fascination on
many minds. They were about that future into
which we so eagerly peer, and about Israel and its
relation to those hateful dominant Gentiles, whose
pride was so soon to be laid low. That future
belonged to those Jewish readers, who were the
1 elect,' and it was painted in such wondrous outline,
and with such bright colouring. Even the mystical
symbolism of the language and imagery was an
additional charm. It implied a peculiar knowledge,
which would form an inner select circle among the
1 elect,' who would daily make proselytes, as they
unfolded the wonders of their discoveries, or pro-
duced a new book a rare acquisition in those days
or discussed the different interpretations offered.
But of all this literature only the following eight
books have remained none of them (as already
stated) in Hebrew or Aramsean, and most of them
only in first, or even second translation.
Comp. the literature of the subject especially the edition of the
Pseudepiyrapha by 0. F. Fritzsche, Lips. 1871 ; J. A. Fabricins, Codex
Pseudepigr. Vet. Test., 2nd ed., 1722 ; Hilgeufeld, Messias Judceorum,
Lips. I860; and Drunimond, The Jezvish Messiah. For later Hebrew
Pseudepigrapha though not in the strict sense of the term see Jellinelr,
Beth ha Midrash, 6 Parts, 1857-73. But, indeed, the literature of
the subject is large, and, comparatively spealdug, not always easy to
master.
EECT. xi. THE PSEUDEPIGRAPHA. 339
a. Probably the oldest of them is the so-called
Book of Enoch,' numbering 108 chapters. It con-
sists, besides a Prologue and an Epilogue, of five por-
tions, giving an account of the fall of the angels, of
Enoch's rapt journeys through heaven and earth,
together with certain apocalyptic portions about the
Kingdom of Heaven and the Advent of the Messiah.
The oldest part of it is supposed to date from about
150 B.C. ; the second oldest from the time of Herod
the Great ; the date of the others cannot be fixed.
b. ' The Sibylline Oracles,' in Greek hexameters,
consist in their present form of twelve books. They
are full of interpolations the really ancient portions
forming part of the first two books, and the largest
part of book iii. (vv. 97-807). These sections are
deeply imbued with the Messianic spirit. They date
from about 140 before our era, while another small
portion of the same book is supposed to date from
the year 32 B.C.
c. The small collection known as the < Psalter of
Solomon ' consists of eighteen Psalms, and probably
dates from more than half a century before our era.
The work, which I regard as fragmentary, breathes
ardent Messianic expectancy.
d. ' Little Genesis,' or ' The Book of Jubilees,'
dates probably from about the time of Christ. It
is a kind of supplement to the Book of Genesis,
and breathes a strong anti-Eoman spirit.
340 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. rams. xi.
e. From about the same time, or a little earlier,
dates the so-called ' Assumption of Moses ' unfortu-
nately only a fragment of twelve chapters. It con-
sists of an historical and an apocalyptic portion, and
is strongly anti-Pharisaic in spirit, especially as re-
gards purifications. This is very remarkable ; nor is
it less interesting to find that this is one of the works
from which St. Jude quotes (ver. 9), the other being
the Book of Enoch (vv. 14, 15) ; and even more so,
that St. Paul seems to have been familiar with it.
His account of the corruptness of the men in ' the
last times ' * so clearly corresponds with that in the
'Assumption of Moses' (vii. 3-10), that it is difficult
to believe the language of the Apostle had not in
part been borrowed from it.
f. and g. On the other hand, there are two of the
Pseudepigrapha which bear evident reference to the
writings of St. Paul. Both of them date after the
destruction of Jerusalem ; but * The Apocalypse of
Baruch ' is probably older than 4 Esdras (our apocry-
phal 2 Esdras). The ' Apocalypse of Baruch ' is also
unfortunately not quite complete. It consists of
eighty-seven chapters. Our interest is stirred by
noticing how closely some of its teaching runs along-
side that of St. Paul either controversially, as in
regard to the doctrine of justification ; or concili-
atorily and intermediately, as in regard to the con-
2 Tim. iu. 1-6.
ttsoi. it $HE PSEUDEPIGRAPHA. B4l
sequences of the fall in original guilt ; or imitatively,
as in regard to the resurrection of the body. If the
author of the 'Apocalypse of Baruch' must have
read the Epistles of St. Paul to the Eomans and the
First to the Corinthians, the influence of Paulina
teaching appears even more strongly, almost exag-
geratedly, in the statements of 4 Esdras in regard
to the fall and original sin.
h. Lastly among these works, we have to men-
tion the so-called ' Ascension and Vision of Isaiah,'
describing the martyrdom of the prophet, and con-
taining certain Apocalyptic portions about what he
saw in heaven. Although based on an older Jewish
document, the book is chiefly of Christian heretical
authorship.
2. Such are the monuments left us of the ancient
Apocalyptic or, as from their assumption of spuri-
ous authorship it is called, Pseudepigraphic litera-
ture. Its interest is threefold. 1st. Historical. They
set before us another direction than either in the
Apocrypha or in Hellenism; As previously stated,
the Apocrypha are either historical including the
legendary or else philosophising. They carry us
back to the glories of Judaism, or else seek to re-
concile it with present thought and philosophy __
which, indeed, is the final object of Hellenism. But
this Apocalyptic literature represents a quite dif-
ferent tendency. It lays, so to speak, one hand
342 PROPHECY AM) HISTORY. Lfecr. ii.
on the Old Testament hope, while with the other
it gropes after the fulfilment in that dim future,
of which it seeks to pierce the gloom. 2ndly. The
Pseudepigrapha are of theological interest, as show-
ing what the Jews before and about the time of
Christ or at least one section of them were ex-
pecting concerning the Messiah and Messianic times.
One might indeed long to know something more
of the personal views and feelings of yet another
class that represented in New Testament history by
such names as Zacharias, Elizabeth, Anna, Simeon,
and even Joseph and the Virgin Mother, But beyond
the thought that their steadfast gaze was bent on the
Eastern sky, where sure prophecy taught them that
the Sun of Righteousness would rise, we have not
the means of associating with them anything more
definite than intense, simple, and receptive expect-
ancy. Srdly. Yet another, and only in one sense
inferior, interest attaches to these writings. We
may designate it as exegetical. For, if these books
represent the symbolism and the form in which
Apocalyptic thoughts presented themselves to a
large portion of the Jewish people, it will readily be
understood, that knowledge of it must also be of
great importance in the study of the Apocalyptic por-
tions of the New Testament not, indeed, as regards
the substance, but the form and imagery of them.
Eor our present argument, however, we only re-
EOi. ii. INTEREST OF THIS LITERATURE,
quire to present a general account of the teaching of
these writings concerning the Messiah, and the Mes-
sianic kingdom. Here we are not obliged to limit
our review to such of them as are strictly pre-Chris-
tian, since the views on this subject entertained in the
first century of our era could not have been materially
different from those in the preceding century. 1
1. As regards the promise of the Messiah. Here
we turn in the first place, and with special in-
terest, to the ' Sibylline Oracles.' In the third book
of these, which (in such portions as I shall quote
from) dates from about 140 B.C., the Messiah is de-
scribed as ' the King sent from heaven,' who would
' judge every man in blood and splendour of fire.' 2
And the vision of Messianic times opens with a refer-
ence to ' the King whom God will send from the
Sun.' 3 We cannot fail here to perceive a reference
to Psalm Ixxii., especially as we remember that the
Greek (LXX) rendering, which must have been pre-
sent to the Hellenist Sibyl, fully adopted the Messianic
application of the passage to a premundane Messiah.
We also think of the picture drawn in the prophecies
of Isaiah. According to the Sibylline books, King
Messiah was not only to come, but He was to be
specifically sent of God. He is supermundane,
1 On this subject generally, I must refer to my book on The Life
and Times ofJesws the Messiah, which -I have naturally followed in thia
outline.
8 vv. 286, 287. Some have, however, referred this to Cyrus
3 ver. 652.
344 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. EBCT. xt,
a King and a Judge of superhuman glory and splen-
dour. And, indeed, that a superhuman kingdom,
such as the Sibylline Oracles paint, 1 should have a
superhuman King, seems only a natural and neces-
sary inference. One other remark though some-
what aside from the subject must be allowed. If,
as certain modern critics contend, the Book of
Daniel is not authentic, but dates from Maccabean
times and refers to the Maccabees, it may well be
asked to what king the Sibylline Oracles point,
which certainly date from that period ; and what is
the relationship between the supposed Maccabean
prophecies of the Book of Daniel, and the certainly
Messianic anticipations of the undoubted literature
of that period ?
Even more distinct than the utterances of the
Sibylline Oracles are those of the so-called { Book
of Enoch,' the oldest portion of which dates, as
already stated, from about the year 150 B.C. Our
difficulty here is, that a certain class of critics have,
although I believe wrongly, assigned a portion of
the book, which is full of the most interesting refer-
ences to the Messiah as ' the Woman's Son,' ' the Son
of Man,' the Elect,' ' the Just One,' to Christian
authorship and interpolation. In order not to occupy
any controverted ground, I propose to omit all refer-
ences to these portions. But even in the admittedly
1 vv. 652-807, passim.
tfccr. it ITS MESSIANIC TEACHING. 345
oldest part the Messiah is designated as c the Son of
God,' l not, indeed, in the Christian sense of Eternal
Sonship, but as indicating superiority over all crea-
tures ; and this is further expressed by a symbolic
description of the Messiah as He Whom * all the
beasts of the field and all the fowls of heaven dread,
and to Whom they cry at all times.' 2
A still more emphatic testimony conies to us from
tne ' Psalter of Solomon,' which dates from more than
half a century before Christ. The King who is to
reign is described as of the house of David. 3 He is
the Son of David, Who comes, at a time known only
to God, to reign over Israel. He is a righteous King,
taught of God. He is Christ the Lord ; He is pure
from sin, and thus can rule His people, and banish
His enemies by His Word. God renders Him strong
in the Holy Ghost, wise in council, with might and
righteousness. This is the beauty of the King of
Israel, Whom God hath chosen to set Him over the
house of Israel to rule it.' And yet we remember
that no descendant of David was in view in those
dark times.
2. I must be even more brief in my account of
the teaching of the Pseudepigrapha about the blessed-
ness which Israel would experience in Messianic days.
In the Book of Enoch 4 Israel is represented as in the
1 cv. 2. a xc. 37. xvii. 5, 23-25, 32 -So, 38, 47.
4 Ivii., comp. xc. 33.
346 PROPHECY AND HISTORIC IECI. It.
Messianic days coining in carriages, and borne on
the wings of the wind from East, and West, and
South. Again, the Jewish Sibyl connects these three
events : the coming of the Messiah, the rebuilding of
the Temple, and the restoration of the Dispersed, 1
when all nations would bring their wealth to the
house of God. 2 The Psalter of Solomon bursts into
this strain : s Blessed are they who shall live in those
days in the reunion of the tribes which God brings
about.' Then ' the King, the Son of David,' having
purged Jerusalem and destroyed the heathen, would
by His Word gather together a holy people and rule
over it with justice, and judge the tribes, allotting
to them tribal possessions, when ' no stranger would
any longer dwell among them.' 3 In the ' Book of
Jubilees' we are told, that God would gather
all Israel 'from the midst of the heathen, build
among them His Sanctuary, and dwell with them.'
That Sanctuary was ' to be for ever and ever,' and
God would appear in view of every one, and every
one would acknowledge that He was 'the God of
Israel, and the Father of all the children of Jacob,
and King upon Mount Zion from everlasting to ever-
lasting.' 4 We pause for a moment at these words
of perhaps a contemporary of Christ, to realise what
indignation it must have called forth in the hearts
1 iii. 652-735. 2 iii. 766-783. Ps. xvii. passim.
* i. j comp. xxxiii.
LECT.XI MESSIANIC TIMES. 34?
of those who expected all this, when the charge,
however false, was spread that He Who professed
to be the Messiah, but was really only the carpenter
of Nazareth, had actually proposed to destroy the
Temple, instead of bestowing upon it eternal glory.
On the utterances of the 4th Book of Esdras it is
not necessary to speak at length, as the work forms
part of our collection of Apocrypha. This only will
we say, that if ch. xiii. 27-50 is carefully examined,
it will be seen how deeply tinged is the prophetic
description which it contains with the teaching of
the Gospels and the Words of our Lord concerning*
' the last things ' although, not as He put it, but in
a Judaic form. In fact, it seems impossible to avoid
the conclusion, that the writer had been acquainted
with the Discourses about the 'Last Things.' The
inference to which this leads as to the date of the
Gospels of SS. Matthew and Luke need scarcely be
indicated.
3. What has been said about the * Last Things '
reminds us of another point connected with the Mes-
sianic reign, to which these Pseudepigrapha refer.
In common with all Jewish writings, they speak of a
period of woe, commonly called the ' Sorrows of the
Messiah.' This was to precede the Advent of the
Christ. But it would not be difficult to point out
the essential differences in regard to this between
Jewish thinking and the Discourses of Christ on
348 tBOPHECY AND HISTORY. EEOT. xt
the subject, much misunderstood as they have
been.
We can only notice the account given in the
Pseudepigrapha of the ' signs ' which were to usher
in the Advent of the Messiah. Among thes*e, the
Sibylline Books mention a kind of warfare visibly
going on in the air, 1 swords in the starlit sky, the
falling from it of dust, the extinction of the sun, and
the dropping of blood from the rocks. In 4th
Esdras 2 we find the expression of distinctly Judaic
views, although once more tinged by New Testament
'influence, especially as regards the moral aspect of
these ' signs.' The Book of Jubilees 3 gives a detailed
description of the wickedness and physical distress
then prevailing upon earth. According to the Sibyl-
line Books, 4 when these signs in air and sky would
appear most fully, and the unburied bodies that
covered the ground were devoured by birds and wild
beasts, or swallowed up by the earth, God would
send the King Who would put an end to all unright-
eousness. After this would the last war against Jeru-
salem ensue, when God would fight from heaven
against the nations, and they ultimately submit them-
selves to Him. 6
Substantially the same views appear in the Book
of Enoch expressed in symbolic language. 6 We are
: iii. 795-806. 8 v. 1-3 ; yi. 18-28. 8 xxiii.
iii. 633-652. s w. 660-697. 6 xc. 16-38, passim.
St. THE SIGNS OF MESSIAH. 549
told that, in the land, now restored to Israel, the Mes-
siah-King would reign in a new Jerusalem, purified
from all heathen elements, and transformed. That
Jerusalem had been shown to Adam before his fall,
but after that withdrawn, as well as Paradise. It had
been again shown to Abraham, to Moses, and to Ezra.
Its splendour baffled description. As regards the
relation of the heathen nations to that kingdom, views
differed according to the more or less Judaic stand-
point of the writers. In the Book of Jubilees, Israel
is promised possession of the whole earth, and ' rule
over all nations according to their pleasure.' In the
' Assumption of Moses ' this ascendancy of Israel is
conjoined with vengeance upon Borne. On the other
hand, in the Sibylline Oracles the nations are repre-
sented as, in view of the blessings upon Israel, turning
to acknowledge God, .when perfect mental enlighten-
ment, absolute righteousness, as well as physical well-
being, would prevail under the rule (literal or moral)
of the Prophets. This, as we know, was the Hellenist
Messianic ideal. Lastly and this marks another
point of divergence from the New Testament the
Pseudepigrapha uniformly represent the Messianic
reign as eternal, and not broken by any apostasy.
Then would the earth be renewed, and the Eesur-
rection follow. The latter would, at least according
to the Apocalypse of Baruch, be under the same
conditions in which men had died, so as to prove
350 PROPHECY AND HISTOEY. EEOT. xt
that it was really a resurrection of the old. Only
after that would the transformation of the risen take
place the just appearing in angelic splendour, while
the wicked would fade away.
After this brief review, it will, I hope, be admitted
that the evidence is complete of the existence of
a Messianic hope during the interval between the
close of the Canon and the corning of Christ and
this, alike in the Grecian and the Palestinian Jewish
world. To say that it had grown out of Old Testa-
ment prophecy, and was intertwined with the life
of the Jewish people, seems now only a truism. On
the other hand, it must also be clear, that the Old
Testament Messianic idea had undergone great, I
had almost said terrible, modifications. As regards
its form of presentation, it had become external and
almost ossified. The figurative language of the Pro-
phets had been perverted into a gross literalism,
which gave its colouring to the picture of the Mes-
siah and of His kingdom and reign. As regards the
substance of the prophetic hope, we remark that
there was not any enlargement, nor spiritual develop-
ment, of the Old and preliminary dispensation, nor
yet any reference to the new law to be written in
the heart, and to the new spiritual blessings in for-
giveness and righteousness. In short, we perceive
not any outlook on a new state and condition of
things : only an apotheosis of the old. The grand
ii.
TEACHING OF CfiKlST. 351
universalism, when all mankind would become chil-
dren of the Heavenly Father, is lost behind a mere
triumph of Judaism, thus giving place to an exclusive
and narrow nationalism. Lastly, the moral elements
regarding sin, repentance, spiritual preparation, and
universal mercy in short, the distinctively Christian
and, we may add, eternal elements, are wanting. Not
so did the Old Testament present the Messianic hope ;
not so could it have presented it as good tidings to
all men.
Before proceeding to point to the period of ful-
filment in Christ, we may here pause to mark the
contrast between the Messianic idea, as presenced in
almost contemporary literature, and the preaching
of the Baptist, and still more, that of the Christ
"Whom he announced. We think of that herald-voice
in the wilderness calling to repentance and spiritual
preparation ; still more, of the Christ Himself, with
the words, f Our Father ' ever on His lips ; with
the deeds of eternal compassion and eternal mercy
ever in His life ; with the love of absolute self-sur-
render and self-sacrifice in His death ; and we realise
this as the meaning and outcome of His Mission that
He has opened the Kingdom of Heaven to all be-
lievers. We think of His world-Mission and of the
regeneration of man, and of His teaching to all
mankind, whether Jews or Gentiles, We remember
that, of the many hopes which He kindled, of the
S52 PKOPHECY AND HISTORY. EOT. it
many expectations of which He brought the realisa-
tion, He, a Jew and the Jewish Messiah, was only
silent on one, but this the only one which occupied
His contemporaries the glorification of Israel, and
its exaltation. His kingdom was to be within the
soul : of righteousness, and peace, and joy in the
Holy Ghost. Surely, this Christ, Whom the Gospels
present to us so Jewish, and yet so utterly un-
Jewish this King of Israel and Desire of all nations,
was in very truth the fulfilment and the completion
of the Old Testament promise the Sent-of-God
not merely Jeshua, the Carpenter's Son of Nazareth
in Galilee, nor yet the outcome of the Messianic
thoughts and expectancy of His time and of its con-
ceptions. And as we realise the essential difference
between this Christ of all humanity, Who meets the
inmost wishes and the deepest craving of our hearts
and that of the Jewish ideal, we feel that both He
and His teaching must have been of God.
85S
LECTUEE XH.
THE LAST STAGE IN MESSIANIC PROPHECY : JOHN THE BAPTIST ;
HIS CHARACTER AND PREACHING. THE FULFILMENT IN
CHRIST.
And thou, child, shalt be called the prophet of the Highest: for thou
shalt go before the face of the Lord to prepare His ways. ST. LUKE i. 76.
THE more we succeed in transporting ourselves into
those times, the less shall we wonder that multitudes
flocked to the preaching of the Baptist, from ' Jeru-
salem and all Judea, and all the region round about
Jordan.' It was, indeed, in more than the barely
literal sense, 'A Voice crying in the wilderness.'
Never before in the history of Israel had there been
such absence of every prospect of a new life. If,
on the eve of the rising of the Maccabees, heathen
opposition had been more systematic and cruel, im-
perilling the very existence of Judaism, there was at
least a reaction in Israel, a conflict, and the pos-
sibility, if not the prospect, of national deliverance.
But only wild fanatics could, unless maddened by
despair, have hoped to shake off the rule of Eome,
represented by the insolence and tyranny of a Pilate.
With such a governor in place of the Son of David,
with the High Priesthood almost hereditary in the
A A
354 PEOPHECY AND flISTOElf. riser, xii
proverbially corrupt and avaricious fumily of Annas,
the condition of tilings seemed hopeless; while with-
in Israel itself the life-blood of the Old Testament
could scarcely pulsate any longer through the ossified
arteries of Traditionalism and Babbinism. The self-
righteousness and externalisrn of the Pharisees, the
indifference and pride of the Sadducees, the semi-
heathen mysticism of the Essenes, the wild extrava-
gance into which Nationalism was running, all this
was, indeed, making the once pleasant land a moral
wilderness.
And now, of a sudden, ' the Yoice' was heard in
the wilderness ! It was not that of Pharisee, Sad-
ducee, Essene, or Nationalist and yet the Baptist
combined the best elements of all these directions.
He insisted on righteousness, though not in the sense
of the Pharisees ; nay, his teaching was a protest
against their externalism, since it set aside the
ordinances of Traditionalism, though not after the
manner of the Sadducees. John also practised
asceticism and withdrew from the world, though not
in the spirit of the Essenes ; and as regarded Nation-
alism, none so zealous as the Baptist for the Kingship
of Jehovah and the rule of heaven, though not as
the Nationalists understood it. The Baptist was an
altogether unique personality in that corrupt age.
Even a Herod Antipas heard him ; even a Josephus
recorded his life and woik; even the Pharisees
tic*, in. THE CHARACTER OF THE BAPTIST. 355
and priests from Jerusalem sent a deputation to
inquire nay, to ask him (so truthful was he, and so
little suspected of mere fanaticism) whether he was
'the coming One,' or .Elijah, or one of the prophets.
Let us see what light his history and preaching
reflect on the great Messianic hope of old, and on its
fulfilment in the New Testament.
1. The character and life of the Baptist prove
him to have been sent of God. It is not easy to speak
of him in moderate language. Assuredly, among
those born of women there was none greater than he.
We can picture to ourselves his child-life : how, speci-
ally God-given, he was trained in the home of those
parents whom Holy Scripture describes as ' righteous
before God, walking in all the commandments and
ordinances of the Lord, blameless.' When he had
attained the legal age, he would (or might) take
part in the services of the Temple as a priest ;
and he must have witnessed them, long before that
period. In Jerusalem he must have been brought
into contact with the world of Jewish thought and
religious life. But neither of. these could hold, nor
'yet turn him aside from that calling for which at his
Annunciation the Angelic message had designated him.
What the years of solitude and meditation in
the wilderness, that followed, were to him, we can
only infer from his after-life and preaching. That
they were years of self-discipline, we learn from his
A A.2
856 PKOPHECY AND HISTORY. ESor. itt.
self-abnegation, which rises to the sublimity of en-
tire self-forgetfulness. That they did not issue in
mental and moral hardening, to which such ascetic
life might naturally lead, we infer even from his
openness to doubt, and from the intense sensitiveness
of his conscience, which appears in that sublimely
heroic and most deeply touching incident of his
closing life the embassy of inquiry which he sent
to Christ from his dungeon. And that he was most
true and most truthful, who can doubt that considers
what it must have cost such a man at the close,
nay, near the martyrdom, of such a life, openly to
have stated his difficulties, and to have publicly sent
such a message. That he was simple, absolutely
self-surrendering, and trustful, almost as a child,
every act of his life testifies. That he feared not
the face of man, nor yet courted his favour, but
implicitly acted under a constraining sense of duty
as in the sight of God, his bearing alike towards the
Pharisees and before Herod amply proves. But
above all, it is his generosity, and his unselfishness,
and absolute self-abnegation, which impress us. In a
generation pre-eminently self-righteous, vain-glorious,
and self-seeking, when even on the last journey to
Jerusalem the two disciples nearest to Christ could
only think of pre-eminence of place in the kingdom,
and when, in the near prospect of suffering to the
Master, a Peter could ask: What shall we have?
LECT. XII.
THE TESTIMONY OF JOHN. 357
when, even at the last nieal, the disciples marred the
solemn music of this farewell by the discord of their
wrangle about the order of rank in which they were
to be seated at the Supper the Baptist stands alone
in his life and in his death : absolutely self-forgetful.
Here we would specially remind ourselves of the
two high-points in the personal history of John.
The first of these is marked by the events recorded
in St. John iii. 25-30. Nay, the ascent to it had
begun even before that. It was on the very first
Sabbath of John's emphatic testimony to Jesus as
the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the
world, that the two who stood beside him, his
most intimate and close disciples shall we not also
call them his friends John and Andrew, following
the heavenly impulse that drew their souls, forsook
their master for the yet silent Christ. It was only
the beginning of a far wider defection. Not long
afterwards his remaining disciples and we almost
love them for this generosity of their wrongful zeal
of affectionate attachment came to him with these,
to them, so distressing tidings : ' Master, He who
was with Thee beyond Jordan to Whom thou bearest
witness, behold, the same baptiseth, and all men
come to Him.' So then it seemed as if every tangible
token of success in a life of such self-denial and
labour were to be utterly taken away ! The multi-
tude had turned from him to another, to Whom
358 PEOPHECY AND HISTORY. EBCBP..XU,
he had borne witness ; and even the one solitary
badge of his distinctive mission baptism was no
longer solely his. But immediately we have the
sublime answer which the Baptist made to his
disciples : ' Ye yourselves bear me witness, that I
said, I am not the Christ, but that I am sent before
Him. He that hath the bride is the bridegroom ;
but the friend of the bridegroom, which standeth
and heareth him, rejoiceth greatly because of the
bridegroom's voice : this my joy therefore is ful-
filled. He must increase, but I must decrease.' JSTot
to murmur, but even to rejoice in his seeming failure
of success, so that his preparatory work merged
in the greater Mission of the Christ ; and not in
the hour of exaltation, when most of us feel as
if we could find room for nobler sentiments, but in
the hour of failure, when we, mostly all, become
intensely self-conscious in our disappointments to
express it, not in the resignation of humility, but
with the calm of joyous conviction of its rightness
and meetness : that he was not worthy to loose
the latchet of His sandal this implies a purity,
simplicity and grandeur of purpose, and a strength
of conviction, unsurpassed among men. And, to
me at least, the moral sublimity of this testimony
of John seems among the strongest evidences in
confirmation of the Divine claims and the Mission of
Christ.
SECT, xn. THE PREACHING OF THE BAPTIST. 359
There was yet another high-point in the life of
the Baptist though in a very different direction.
Here evidence comes to us from the opposite pole
in his inner life: not from the strength, but from
the trial of his faith. Months had passed since his
dreary imprisonment at Macchaerus, and yet not
one step would, or perhaps could, the Christ
take on behalf, or for the vindication, of him who
had announced Him as the coming King. And the
tidings which reached the Baptist in his lonely
dungeon about the new Christ, as One Who ate and
drank with publicans and sinners, were seemingly
the opposite of what he had announced, when he
had proclaimed Him as the Judge Whose axe would
cut down the barren tree, and Whose fan would
throughly sift His floor. Or oh, thought too
terrible for utterance ! might it all have been only
a dream, an illusion ? In that dreadful inward
conflict the Baptist overcame, when he sent his
disciples with the question straight to Christ Him-
self. For such a question, as addressed to a pos-
sibly false Messiah, could have had no meaning.
John must have still believed in Him when he sent
to Christ with the inquiry reported both by St.
Matthew (xi. 2-6), and St. Luke (vii. 18-23) : ' Art
Thou He that should come, or do we look for
another?' But at what cost of suffering must it
have been that the Baptist did overcome, and what
360 PEOPHECY AND HISTORY. racrr. xnr.
evidence of truthfulness, earnestness, and nobility of
heart and purpose does it reveal ! And there is yet
another aspect of it. Assuredly, a man so entirely
disillusioned as the Baptist must have been in that
hour, could not have been an impostor, nor yet his
testimony to Christ a falsehood. Nor yet could
the record which shows to us such seeming weak-
ness in the strong man, and such doubts in the great
testimony-bearer, be a cunningly devised fable. I
repeat, that here also the evidential force of the
narrative seems irresistible, and the light most bright
which the character and history of the Baptist shed
on the Mission of Christ.
2. In what has been said we have already in part
anticipated the next point in our argument. And
yet something remains here to be added. For the
character and life of the Baptist cannot be viewed as
isolated from his preaching. On the contrary, they
reflect the strongest light on it, even as, conversely,
his preaching reflects light on his character and life.
One who was, and lived, as the Baptist must also
have been true in his preaching ; one who believed,
and therefore preached, as the Baptist must have
been true in his life. And both his preaching and
his life shed light on the great Old Testament hope,
and on its realisation in Christ.
When we ask ourselves what had determined
the Baptist, after so many years of solitude in. the
LECT. xn. JOHN NOT A FANATICL 361
wilderness, to come forth into such blazing light of
publicity, to which his eyes had been so unaccus-
tomed, and to face those multitudes, to whom he
had so long been a stranger, with a message so novel
and startling, his own account of it leaves us not in
doubt of the motive for a change so complete, and,
as we view it, so uncongenial to him. Unhesita-
tingly, to every kind of audience and inquiry > and
with unwavering assurance, he tells it yet not
in fanatical language that a direct call had come
to him from God ; a direct mission and definite mes-
sage had been entrusted to him from heaven. It
was to announce the Christ, and to prepare for Him,
His public appearance, his call to repentance, his
proclamation, his warnings, his baptism, his instruc-
tion to his converts all imply, that in his inmost
soul he felt, and that he acted, as sent directly from
God. And not only so, but he also expressly tells us
that he had a sign Divinely given him, by which
actually to recognise Him, Whose near Advent was to
be the burden of his preaching. 'And I knew Him
not ; but He that sent me to baptise with water, the
same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the
Spirit descending, and remaining on Him, the same
is He which baptiaeth with the Holy Ghost.' From
this it at least follows, that the Baptist himself enter-
tained no doubt oi his Divine commission to his
special work. <
362 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. LBCI. xn.
One theory in explanation of his assertion we
shall, I think, all dismiss almost instinctively. Cer-
tainly the Baptist did not speak conscious falsehood ;
certainly, he was not an impostor. Of the other
alternative remaining we may, with almost equal
confidence, put aside the supposition that his had
been the dream of a fanatic. This is contradicted
by all the facts of his life. There is not anything
connected with it which we could designate as
fanatical. And there is much to be urged in the
opposite direction. To begin with : it were difficult
to understand how fanaticism could at once attach
itself to One Whom, as he tells us, he had not even
known before He came to him for baptism, and
Whose life had hitherto been one of the utmost
privacy, and under so unpromising circumstances as a
carpenter's home in the far-off Nazareth of that Galilee,
which the Judaeans held in such supreme contempt.
Other considerations also are opposed to the
theory of fanaticism. A fanatic would, in the cir-
cumstances, have at once identified himself with, and
attached himself to Him, Whom he proclaimed as
the Messiah ; and he would have appeared promi-
nent in His following. John remained alone, content
to do his humble work, and willing to retire from the
scene when he had done it. Again, a fanatic would
have been alienated by the loss of his own adherents,
and disappointed when he had to retire into obscurity
. xir. THE PREACHING OF JOHN. 363
and forsakenness. John accepted it, and rejoiced
in it, as the goal of his mission. A fanatic would,
in the peculiar circumstances, have been thoroughly,
and also irretrievably, disillusioned by imprisonment
and the prospect of martyrdom. And the Baptist was
disillusioned of many of the expectations which he
had apparently connected with the kingdom, when he
had announced that the axe was already laid to the
root of the tree. He was disillusioned of these, and
therefore he sent his final inquiry to Christ ; but he
was not disillusioned of the Christ, and therefore he
sent his disciples to Him. But why should we hesitate
to believe what so naturally suggests itself in view of
the character and life of the Baptist : that this good,
true, unselfish, strong man, spoke what was real, and
therefore acted what was true, when he declared
himself to have been Divinely commissioned to an-
nounce, and to prepare for, the coming Saviour ?
And, as we further look at it, is it not quite
opposed to the theory of fanaticism, and quite
accordant with belief in his true Divine commis-
sion, that what the Baptist enjoined as preparation
for the kingdom was so simple and unfanatical. He
preached not asceticism, nor long days of fasting
and devotion ; not enforced poverty, nor prescribed
sacrifices, but repentance, and then a return into
ordinary life, only with a new moral purpose, and
a new resolve to sanctify every occupation, however
364 PROPHECY AND HISTORY. LECT. XH.
lowly or full of temptation, by a simple and earnest
walk with God. It is not thus that a Jewish fanatic
of those days would have spoken to the soldiers of
Herod, nor to the publicans of Borne, nor to sinners,
nor even to the self-righteous who gathered to his
baptism, and asked his direction. Nor is it in such
manner that a Jewish fanatic of those days would
have spoken nor yet even the most advanced in
what represents the extreme opposite, or Hellenist,
direction when he addressed the Jewish people as
a ' generation of vipers,' or referred to them as a tree
to the root of which the axe was laid. We cannot
find anything elsewhere, in any sense, parallel or
even analogous to it. For such language we must
go back to an Isaiah or a Jeremiah. Nor yet would
a Jewish fanatic of those days have said to the
Jewish people : ' Begin not to say within yourselves,
We have Abraham to our father : for I say unto
you, That God is able of these stones to raise up
children unto Abraham.' Eroin all that we have
learned of the history of Israel ; from all that we
have gathered of its literature, whether in the Apo-
crypha or the Pseudepigrapha, we can at least draw
this one unassailable conclusion that anything more
un-Jewish than what John preached, or more unlike
his times, could not be imagined. Assuredly, it
must have come to him as a new fact, and a new
message, directly from heaven.
tiwr. iii. OLD TESTAMENT REFERENCES. 365
And, lastly, as we compare the descriptions in
the Pseudepigrapha, the utterances of the Eabbis, and
the well-known expectations entertained by the people,
with what John the Baptist announced concerning the
coming kingdom, as one not of outward domination
and material bliss, but of inward righteousness and
acknowledgment of God even the most prejudiced
must admit, that if he were a Jewish fanatic, it was
at least not in the language of Jewish fanaticism
that he spoke by the banks of Jordan.
A similar conclusion is reached when we approach
the subject from the opposite direction, and ask our-
selves what light the preaching of the Baptist reflects
on his character and life. Here the one clear out-
standing fact is, that the burden of John's preach-
f
ing was the announcement of the Advent of the
kingdom and of its King. And this, not as some-
thing new, nor yet, on the other hand, as answering
to the expectations of his contemporaries, but solely
as the fulfilment of the Old Testament promise.
All else in his work and preaching was either pre-
paration for, or the sequence from, this announce-
ment. At the very outset of his mission this is
placed in the forefront: 'As it is written in the
book of the words of Esaias the prophet, saying,
The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare
ye the way of the Lord, make His paths straight.'
And this key-note of his preaching is heard in almost
366 PROPHECY AND HiSTO&Y. Efccl.
every recorded utterance of Ms. It would be diffi-
cult, without a detailed examination, to convey how
constantly the Baptist recurs to Old Testament pro-
phecy, and how full his language and its imagery
are of it. His mind seems saturated with the Old
Testament Messianic hope, especially as presented in
the prophecies of Isaiah, and we cannot but con-
clude that, during those many years of his solitary
life in the wilderness, this had been the very food
and drink of his soul. If with reverence be it said
the Mission of Jesus Christ might be summed up
in the words : c Our Father which art in heaven,' that
of His forerunner is contained in these : Lo, the
kingdom of Grod, promised of old to our fathers !
To make this statement more clear, let us think
of the Old Testament sources of the few recorded
sentences in the Baptist's preaching. For such ex-
pressions of his as : * generation of vipers,' we refer
to Isaiah lix. 5 ; for the ' planting of the Lord,' of
which he speaks, to Isaiah v. 7 ; the reference to
these 'trees' recalls Isaiah vi. 13; x. 15, 18, 33;
xl. 24 ; that to the ' fire ' reminds us of Isaiah i. 31 ;
ix. 18 ; x. 17 ; v. 24 ; xlvii. 14 ; the ' floor ' and the
' fan ' are those of Isaiah xxi. 10 ; xxviii. 27, &c. ;
xxx. 24 ; xl. 24 ; xli. 15, &c. ; the duty of the peni-
tent to give e bread and raiment to the poor ' is that
enjoined in Isaiah Iviii. 7 ; while ' the garner' of which
John speaks is that of Isaiah xxi. 10. Besides these we
in.
THE GREAT FULFILMENT. 36t
mark the Isaiah reference in his baptism (Isaiah lii. 15 ;
i. 16), and especially that to * the Lamb of God'
(Isaiah liii.) ; while, lastly, in reply to his final inquiry
through his disciples, Christ points to a solution of his
doubts,' in accordance with the prophecies of Isaiah,
xxxv. 5, 6 ; Ixi. 1 ; viii. 14, 15.
^ n( j ,to sum up in one sentence this part of our
argument if what has been stated in detail is incom-
patible with the theory that John spoke and acted as
a Jewish fanatic, it is, on the other hand, the fact,
that his character, life, and history, as set before us
in the Gospels, are absolutely consistent with the
declaration which he so solemnly made, and upon
which he died, that he had been directly sent of
God to announce the near fulfilment in Christ Jesus
of that great Messianic hope of the Old Testament
which had set his own soul on fire.
One step in the argument still remains although
I almost shrink from taking it. I have in the pre-
ceding course of Lectures endeavoured to show how
the great hope of the Old Testament gradually un-
folded ; I have followed its progression through the
long ages to the period when the last prophet came,
who summed up all Old Testament prophecy, con-
centrated and reflected its light, and pointed to Him
in Whom was the fulfilment. If I were to attempt
describing how completely the Eeality answers to the
portraiture by the Prophets, I would have to pass
tROPHECY AM) HISTORY. LEOI. xii.
in review the entire history of ' the Man of Sorrows, 7
the Sacrifice of the Great High Priest, the teaching
of the Prophet of the New Covenant, the spiritual
glory of the King in His beauty, and the provision
\>
which He has made, to which, not they of that gener-
ation, but all the faithful and true-hearted, from East
and West, and North and South, are bidden welcome,
together with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
Here we must pause since any attempt at com-
parison between our Lord and even those who stood
closest to Him, and were most transformed into
His likeness, seems almost irreverence. This only
will I say, that if we think of the Baptist, or of his
utterances, by the side of those of Christ, we feel that,
however pure and elevated, they still occupy merely
Old Testament ground. Christ stands alone in His
Kingdom. John is within the porch ; Christ has
stepped forth into the free air, into the new light
and the heavenly life. And He has brought it to us
and to all men.
In conclusion, I desire simply to indicate three
great points which seem to mark the fulfilment of
all in Christ. They are : First, the finality of the
New Testament. We are no longer in presence
of preparatory institutions, nor do we expect any
further religious development in the future. All is
now completed and perfected. Secondly, we mark
the universality of the New Testament dispensation
. xn. THE GREAT FDLPILMENT.
and Church, as no longer hemmed in by national
boundaries, or narrowed by national privileges, nor
yet hindered by any limitation, intellectual or spiri-
tual.- It is a universal Church : for all men, for all
times, for all circumstances. Thirdly, we are in view
of this great characteristic spirituality. To every
one of us the Kingdom of God, with its blessings,
comes directly from God ; everyone is to be taught
from above, and taught by the Holy Spirit ; and to
each the teaching is in its principle, perfect ; in its
character, heavenly; and in its nature, a spiritual
life planted within the heart, unfolding and develop-
ing even to the completeness of the better state, and
the ' many mansions ' of the Father's house. If
Christ had taught mankind no more than this, ' Our
Father, which art in heaven,' if He had opened no
other vision, given no other hope than that of the
4 many mansions,' He would have reflected the
light of heaven upon earth, removed its woes, light-
ened its burdens, sweetened its sorrows, and smoothed
its cares. Even so would He have been to mankind
the fulfilment of the great Messianic hope of a uni-
versal brotherhood of peace and of holiness. But
He has been more than this. He hath done what He
hath said ; He hath given what He hath promised.
In Him is the Keality of all, and to all ages. In the
fullest meaning of it, He is ' the Light to lighten the
Gentiles, and the Glory of His people Israel.'
BB
APPENDICES.
EICHHOBN T S ARBANGEMENT OP GENESIS.
Passages -with the Name
of Elohim
Farts Intercalated
Passages with the Name
of Jehovah
Gen. i. 1-ii. 3
v.1-28
v. 30-32
vi.1,2
vi.4
vi.9-22
-vii. 11-16 (with-
out the three
last words)
vii. 18
vii. 19 (perhaps)
vii. 20-22
vii. 24
viii. 1-19
ix.1-17
ix. 28, 29
xl 10-26
Gen. ii. 4-iii. 24
Gen. iv. 1-26
v.29
vi.3
vi. 5-8
vii. 1-9
vii. 16 (the three
last words)
vii. 10
i iv
vu. 17
vii. 19 (perhaps)
vii. 23
viii. 20-22
ix. 18-27
x. 1-32
xi. 1-9
B B 2
3t2
APPENDIX 1.
Passages with the Name
of Elohim
Parts Intercalated
Passages with the Name
of Jehovah
Gen. xi. 27-32
xvii. 1-27
xix. 29-38
xx. 1-17
xxi. 2-32
xxii. 1-10
xxii. 20-24
xxiii. 1-20
xxv. 7-11
xxv. 19, 20
xxvi. 34, 35
xxviii. 1-9
xxviii. 12, 17,
18-22 (partly)
xxx. 1-13
xxx. 17-19
xxx. 20 (the
half)
xxx. 21-24 (in
the middle)
M xxxi, 2
xxxi. 4-48
xxxi. 50-64
xxxii. 1-33
xxxiii. 1-17
xxxiii. 18-34
Gen. xiv.
Gen. xii.-xiii. 18
n :
XVI.
xviii.-xix. 28
xx. 18
xxi, 1
xxi. 33, 34
xxii. 11-19
xxiv. 1-67
xxv. 1-7
xxv. 12-18
xxv. 21-34
xxvi. 1-33
xxvii. 1-46
xxviii. 10-22
,, xxix. 135
xxx. 14-16
xxx. 20 (the
half)
zxx. 24 (the
end)
n xxxi. 1
xxxi. 3
d.49
MCHHORN'S ARRANGEMENT.
373
Passages with the Name
of Elohim
Parts Intercalated
Passages -with the Name
of Jehovah
Gen. xxxiii. 31
I xxxv. 1-29
xxxvi. 1-36
xl.-xlvii.27
xlviii. 1-22
xlix. 29-33
1.12,15
1.15-26
Perhaps Gen. xxxiii.
18, until xxxiv. 31
Gen. xxxvi. 1-43
Perhaps
xlix. 1-27
Gen. xxxviii. 1-30
,, xxxix. 1-23
xlvii. 28-31
xlix. 1-28
1.1-12
1.14
374 APPENDIX It
n.
ANALYSIS OF THE PENTATEUCH AND OP ITS CIOTICISM.
A GENERAL sketch, by way of analysis of the Pentateuch
and of its criticism, may be helpful, if not to the student,
yet to the general reader. For the materials of it I am
indebted to Kleinert, 'Abriss der Einleitung zum Alten
Testament.' To this analysis I propose to add an enumera-
tion of the passages, which Wellhausen designates as com-
posing QP ; and, lastly, a brief notice of some of the
Laws especially in the 'Priest-Code' which the Eabbis
found necessary to modify, for the purpose of adapting
them to the later circumstances of the people.
I. Analysis of the Pentateuch-Legislation (according to
Bertheau and others').
The Pentateuch-Legislation forms one connected whole,
which consists of these three parts :
1 . The fundamental Institutions of civil and religious
life : Exod. xx.-xxiii. ; and Lev. xviii.-xx. Closely connected
with these are the sections: Exod. xxxiv. 11-26 ; xiii. 2-16 ;
Numb, xxxiii. 51, &c. The (first) Exodus group of Laws
(xx.-xxiii.) is based on the manifestation of Jehovah, as the
Deliverer from Egyptian bondage ; the Leviticus-group on
that of Jehovah as the Holy One.
2. The Laws relating to Worship (the Sanctuary, priest-
hood, sacred observances and seasons), which constitute the
main portion of the legislation between Exodus xxv. and
ANALYSIS OF THE PENTATEUCH. 875
lumbers xix. They involve a detailed system of symbol-
ism as regards objects, measurements, and numbers. Such
notices as Lev. vii. 37, 38 ; xi. 46, 47 ; xiii. 59 ; xiv. 54,
55; xv. 32, 33, show, that the groups of Laws to which
they are attached must have circulated as rubrics among
the priesthood,
3. The Deuteronomio Laws, Deut. v.-xxvi., referring to
the civic relations of the people. In part they reproduce
the legislation of the middle books of the Pentateuch but
with the special object of making religion more matter of
the heart, and of softening manners ; while, in part, they
are intended to adapt the former legislation to the settle-
ment of the people in Canaan. This part of the Pentateuch
was intended for popular instruction ; it contains a sort of
popular * constitution ; ' and lays special stress on one central
sanctuary.
The legislation of the middle books is arranged in sec-
tions, grouped, especially, around the numbers 7 and 10 ;
and, whereas in Deuteronomy it is generally Moses who is
introduced as the speaker, in the middle books it is almost
always Grod Who speaks.
II. Testimony of the Pentateuch itself as to its Authorship.
The Pentateuch ascribes its authorship to Moses. Here
we note the following, as expressly attributed to him :
1. The Book of 'The Covenant ' (Exod. xxxiv. 10-26),
in Exod. xxiv. 4, 7; comp. xx. 1.
2. 'The Covenant' (Exod. xx. 2-xxiii. 33), in Exod.
xxxiv. 27.
3. The account of 'the Journeys ' (Numb, xxxiii. 3-49),
in Numb, xxxiii. 2.
4. The 'Book ' concerning Amalek 1 in Exod. xvii; 14.
1 Supposed to le referred to in Deut. xxy. 17-19.
376 APPENDIX n.
5. 'The Book of the Law ' in Dent. xxxi. 9-11 ; 24-26.
6. e The Song ' of Moses (Deut. xxxii.) in Dent. xxxi. 22.
All these notices apply to particular sections of the
Pentateuch, except Deut. xxxi. 911; 2426, which may
refer to the whole Law.
III. References to the Pentateuch in other parts of the
Old Testament.
1. The Law [Thorah] of the Lord is referred to as in
actual existence, and as well known : Ps. xii. 6 ; xvii. 4 ;
xviii. 22 ; xix. 7 ; xxxvii. 31 ; and in Ps. cxix. ; Amos ii. 4 ;
Hos. iv. 6 ; vi. 7 ; viii. 1 ; Jer. ix. 12 ; xi. 2 ; xvi. 11 ; xviii.
18 ; xxxi. 32 ; xliv. 10, 23 ; Zeph. iii. 4; and in the follow-
ing passages in the historical books : 2 Sam. xxii. 23 ; 1
Kings vi. 12 &c. ; ix. 4 ; xi. 33 ; 2 Kings x. 31 ; 1 Chron.
xxii. 12 ; 2 Chron. xv. 3 ; xix. 10; Ezra vii. 10.
(The above are irrespective of verbal references, and
allusions to notices and events in the Pentateuch.)
2ndly. There are references to the Pentateuch as written,
or a 'book,' in Ps. xl. 7, 8 ; Hosea viii. 12 ; Jer. viii. 8 ;
comp. xxxi. 33. And in the historical books : Josh. i. 8 ;
viii. 31 ; xxiv. 26 ; 2 Kings xi. 12 ; xiv. 6 ; xxii. 8 ; xxiii.
3, 21, 24 ; 2 Chron. xvii. 9 ; Neh. ix. 3.
3rdly. There are references to the Law as specifically
that of Moses in Mai. iv. 4; Dan. ix. 11, 13; and in the
historical books : Josh. i. 7 ; viii. 31 ; xxii. 5 ; xxiii. 6 ;
1 Kings ii. 3 ; 2 Kings xiv. 6 ; xviii. 6, 12 ; 2 Chron.
xxiii. 18; xxv. 4; xxxiv. 14; xxxv. 12; Ezra iii. 2; vi.
18 ; vii. 6 ; Neh. viii. 1, 14.
(The Commandments, as commanded by the Prophets
Ezra ix. 11 are distinguished from the Law of Moses in
2 Kings xvii. 13 ; Zech. vii. 12 ; comp. Dan. ix. 10, 11 5
6kftioix>x VIEW. 87?
tbat of the Pentateuch being specifically designated as * the
Law, ' Neh. x. 34.
IV. Testimony of Tradition concerning the Pentateuch.
1. The earliest testimony of the Synagogue and the
Church is to the effect, that Moses wrote the whole Penta-
teuch, with the exception of the last eight verses, which
were added by Joshua. So in Babha B. 14 6. According
to Josephus l and Philo, 2 the last eight verses are also
Mosaic. According to Ber. 12 6 ; Meg. 22 a ; Taan. 27 ct,
the division into Parashahs and verses is also due to Moses.
2. The later Judseo-Christian tradition is thus expressed
by Tertullian : 3 f Hierosolymis Babylonica expugnatione
deletis ornne instrumentum Judaicse literature per Esdram
constat restauratum esse.' 4
Y. Modern Orthodox View.
The whole Pentateuch, with the exception of the closing
section, was written by Moses. This closing section is vari-
ously denned as commencing at Deut. xxxi. 1 ; Deut. xxxi.
24; Deut. xxxii. 44; Deut. xxxii. 48 ; and Deut. xxxiii. 1.
The view just described is supported by the following
arguments :
1. That it is that of the Synagogue and of the New
Testament.
2. That it is borne out by the references in the Old
Testament which we have already quoted.
3. That the Pentateuch has a unique literary character
of its own, differing from that of the other books in the Old
Testament.
1 Ant. iv. 8. 48. De VM Mosis, iii. 39.
De Sab. Mulieb. Si. * Oomp. 4 Esdr. xiv. 18 &c.
378 APPENDIX it
4. That the historical notices, as also the subsequent.
books, of the Old Testament necessarily presuppose the
existence of the Pentateuch.
5. That the account in the four last books of the
Pentateuch gives the impression of having been written by
an eye-witness, and that Genesis could not have been com-
posed posterior to these books.
6. That the theory which treats the Pentateuch as con-
sisting of different documents, dating from different periods,
is unproved, unsatisfactory, and open to many objections,
and leaves room for every variety of differing opinions,
thus showing its unreliableness.
(The difference in the use of the Names of (rod, and
other supposed marks of different authorship are explained
as intentional. At the same time, many writers on the
orthodox side have admitted the existence of later glosses in
the Pentateuch.)
VI. General Objections of Negative Criticism to the Mosaic
Authorship of the Pentateuch.
1. Moses appears in the Pentateuch as belonging to a
period of history that is past; his character is discussed,
and his death related. 1 "
2. Not only the pre-Mosaic, but the Mosaic history is
told not in a regular manner, but incompletely, and not always
clearly, while large periods of it are altogether omitted.
3. There are in the Pentateuch twofold relations of the
same events, contradictions, and also narratives which ex-
pressly refer to other sources.
4. From the geographical point of view, the notices are
1 Oomp. here Exod. vi. 26, 27; xi. 3; Deut. xxxiii. 4; Numb, xii
3, 6 ; Deut. xxxiv.
MODERN RECONSTRUCTION.
such as to show that the Pentateuch dates after the settle-
ment in Canaan ; while, from the historic point of view,
there are references to the time of Moses as one already
past, and to events and names which imply a later date.
5. The legislation of the Pentateuch is not only ex-
clusively adapted to the settlement in Canaan, but seems to
imply a lengthened development following upon the latter.
These and similar objections have, it is hoped, been
sufficiently met in Lectures VII. and VIII., or, at least,
principles have been laid down which are of easy applica-
tion to such objections ; while reasons have been adduced
which render the theory of a late composition of the Penta-
teuch untenable.
VII. Analysis of the supposed Structure of the
Pentateuch.
The modern (more or less negative) School of Critics, to
which frequent reference has been made, supposes the Pen-
tateuch to embody, besides certain ancient pieces, three
great, and some subsidiary, documents the whole having
been afterwards ( redacted ' into one work.
A. The supposed very ancient (partly Mosaic) pieces
and fragments in the Pentateuch are stated to be the
foll6wing :
1. The Decalogue, Exod. xx. 1-17.
2. The substance of the song, Exod. xv.
3. A number of legislative and dogmatic utterances, and
remains of ancient popular poems.
4. The main body of ritual laws : Lev. i.-vii. ; xi.-xvii. ;
Numb. xix.
5. The sketch of the tabernacle, Exod. xxv.-xxxi.
6. Diverse fragments of popular books, chiefly bio-
graphical.
380 APPENDIX! It
7. The ' Book of the Covenant, ' Exod. xxi.-xxiii.
8. The law about the Amalekites in Dent. xxv. 17-19.
9. The main body of the Laws in Lev. xviii.-xx.
10. The basis of Dent, xxxiii.
B. But the main body of the Pentateuch is supposed to
consist of the following three documents :
1. The work of the Elohist, also called the * 1st Elohist,'
' the original document,' ' the Book of the Origins,' ' the
Annalist,' &c. This document is supposed to embrace the
main body of ritual laws (all Leviticus), and a continuous
historical narrative, from Genesis i. to Deut. xxxiv., although
scanty in extent and details. The historical narrative
marks three stages. In the first, Grod is designated as
Elohim ; in the second, as El Shaddai ; and only from the
Exodus onwards as Jahveh. Corresponding to these are
three stages of the Covenant: that of peace with the
world ; of promise to the fathers ; and of the Law with
Israel. No ritual observances appear enjoined previously
to the Legislation on Mount Sinai, although the principal
epochs are marked by theocratic institutions. The style and
conception of the work are easily distinguishable : in older
times, simple and reverent; in Mosaic times, priestly.
The legislation is carried out almost upon a system hence,
frequently of an abstract character. The genealogies are
marked by a regard for special numbers.
(The widest differences prevail as to "the date of the
historical and the ritual portions of this work, and whether
they are due to one or two authors ; as also which of the
two is the older. On these points details would be here out
of place. We only remark that opinions differ as to the date
of the composition of one or another part of the work, the
differences being so great as to vary from the time of Saul
to that after the Exile.)
MODERN HYPOTHESIS 381
2. The work of f the Jehovist ; ' or the * Supplementer ; '
the ' fourth ' or else ' fifth narrator ; ' the * prophetic nar-
rator,' &c. In this document the name Jahveh appears from
the first. An observance of Theocratic ordinances is said to
be assumed in it as from the first ; the style is vivid ; the
views expressed concerning the nature of man and revelation
are of a developed character -in short, the book is declared
to bear the prophetic impress. According to some, these
Jehovist portions do not form part of an independent work,
but are only intended to supplement the work of the Elohist ;
while, according to others, the work of the Jehovist was an
independent and original composition. Some also hold that
the work was mainly a compilation from materials already
existing. The work is described as mainly historical, and
containing the oldest civil laws and old national hymns.
It was composed after the separation of Judah and Israel
(between 975 and 775 B.C.), and by a Judsean.
3. The work of the Deuteronomist, variously dated from
the time of the Judges to that of Manasseh or of Josiah.
The writer is supposed to have known the work of the
Jehovist. To these three must be added :
C. Certain subsidiary documents in the Pentateuch :
1. ' The Book of the Wars of Jehovah ' (Numb, xxi 14).
According to some this was a very ancient collection of
war- and popular poems; according to others, a larger
historical work which the Jehovist incorporated into his own
book.
2. 'The Younger Elohist,' or the 'third,' or else the
'theocratic narrator,' whose work is supposed to comprise
those parts of Genesis which accord with the original
Elohist in the use of the name Elohim, but have not any of
the other peculiarities of this writer, as well as some other
portions in the other books of the Pentateuch. According
382 APPENDIX n.
to some, the author was an Ephraimite. Certain critics
place its composition in the time of Hezekiah, and sup-
pose that it formed a kind of basis for the labours of the -
Jehovist.
3. According to some critics, the ritual portions in the
book of Ezekiel (xl.-xlviii.) form the basis of the ritual
legislation in the work of the Elohist, especially in that part
of it beginning with Lev. xvii.
4. Some critics speak of a Deuteronomer (in distinction
to the Deuteronoinist), who completed the work in the
spirit and style of the Deuteronomist, but at a later time and
tinder different circumstances, adding Deut. xxxiv. 10-12 ;
xxix. 21-27; xxx. 1-10; xxxi. 24-29; perhaps also xxviii.
28-37 and 49-57, as well as the address, Deut. i.-iv.
D. Finally we have the Redaction of the whole work.
There had been a preliminary redaction by the Jehovist.
According to some, the final redaction of the Pentatench
was made by the Deuteronomist, while others regard it as
posterior to Deuteronomy, and variously place it in the time
of Josiah (Ewald) ; shortly before the Exile (Kuenen) ; under
Ezra (Bertheau); or after Ezra (Graf, Kayser). In this
redaction the plan of the Elohist is supposed to have been
followed, and extended to the whole Pentateuch.
VIII. The Document QP according to Wellhausen.
This document is said to consist of the following sections
and verses in the Pentateuch : * Gren. i.-ii. 4 a ; v. (omit-
ting ver. 29); vi. 9-22; vii. 11-viii. 5 (omitting vii. 12,
166, 17, 22, 23, viii. 26); viii. 13-] 9; ix. 1-17,28, 29;
1 The letters a and b indicate the first or the second half of a verse.
Comp, for this analysis Jahrb. fur Deutsche TheoL, 1876 ; Straclj, in
Herzog's UncyM., vol. xi. p. 457 ; and Hoffmann in the Magazinfur d.
Wissensch. d. Judenth., 1879, p. 4.
WELLHAUSEN'S QP. 383
x. 1-7, 20, 22, 23, 31, 32 ; xi. 10-32 (omitting ver. 29) ;
xii. 4 6, 5 ; xiii. 6, 11 6, 12 ; xix. 29 ; xi. 30 ; xvi. 3, 15, 16;
xvii.; xxi. 2 6-5; xxiii.;.xxv. 7-17 (omitting lla), 19, 20, 266;
xxvi. 34, 35 ; xxvii. 46 xxviii. 9 ; xxix. 24, 29 (? ?) ; xxxi. 18
(beginning with * and all his goods ') ; xxxv. 9-15 (omitting
the word ' again ' in ver. 9), 22 6-29 ; xxxvi. 6-8 ; xxxvi.
40 to the words 'these are the generations of Jacob' in
xxxvii. 2; xlvi. 6, 7 (probably also 8-27); xlvii. 5-11
(omitting 66), 276, 28; xlviii. 3-6 (perhaps 7); xlix.
(ver. 28 ?) 29-33 ; 1. 12, 13. Exodus i. 1-5, 7 (omitting the
words 'multiplied and waxed'), 13, 146, and the first half
of 14 a ; ii. 23 (beginning at ' the children of Israel
sighed ')-25; vi. 2-vii. 13, 19, 20 a, 216, 22, 23; viii.
1-3, 116-15; ix. 8-12; xii. 1-20, 28, 37 a, 40,41; xii.
43-xiii. 2, 20 ; xiv. 1, 2 and in 4 the words ' and they did
so,' 8 6, 9 (omitting the word ' all ' before ' the horses,' and
ending with 'and his army'), 10 (containing, however,
only the words ' and the children of Israel cried out unto
the Lord'), 15 (omitting the words 'Wherefore criest
thou unto me?'), 28 (??); xvi. 1-3, 9-13 a, 16 6-18 a,
22-26, 31 35 ci; xvii. 1 (omitting the words 'there was no
water for the people to drink ') ; xix. 1 (a supplementation),
2 a ; xxiv. 15, from ' and a cloud covered the mount ' to the
words ' Moses went into the midst of the cloud 'in 18 ; xxv.
1-xxxi. 17, 18 (?) ; xxxiv. 29-32, 33-35 (?); xxxv.-xl. All
Leviticus. Numbers i. 1-x. 28 ; xiii. 1-17 a, 21, 25, 26 a. and
first half of 6, 32 to ' and all the people that we saw in it,'
&c. ; xiv. la, 2 a, 5-7, 10, 26, 27, 28, 29 (?), 34-36; xv. ;
xvi. 1, 2 (in part), 8-11, 16-22, 35 ; xvii.-xx. 1 a, 2, 3 6, 6,
12 (probably), 22-29 ; xxi. 4 (the beginning), 10, 11 (?) ;
xxv. 6-xxxi. ; xxxii. 16-19 (leaving out the word 'ready-
armed' in 17), 24, 28-33; xxxiii.-xxxvi. Deut. xxxii.
48-52; xsxiv. la, 7a (?), 8, 9. Josh. iv. 19; v. 10-12;
384 APPENDIX II.
ix. 1721, 156; xiii. 15-33 (secondarily); xviii. 1 (inserted
here) ; xiv. 1-5 (3 secondarily) ; xv. (excepting 13-19 and
some other things) ; xvi. 4-8 ; xvii. 1-4, 7, 9 (leaving out
the words ' these cities of Ephraim are among the cities of
Manasseh') ; xviii. 11-25 ; xix. (leaving out 47, 49, 50, also
the enumeration of the names of cities and perhaps other
parts) ; xx. (the Deuteronomic additions to it are very late) ;
xxi. 1-42 ; xxii. 9-34.
(In this analysis no notice has heen taken of R ie. the
Eedactor, to whom certain connecting words or verses are
attributed notably these five : in G-en. xxxv. 9 the word
'again'; Exod. xvi. 6-8, 36 ; xx. 11; in Josh. ix. 27 the
words * for the congregation and ' ; and Josh. xvi. 9.
The reader will now, in some measure, understand what
was meant when, in the text of these Lectures, the Penta-
teuch, as reconstructed by Wellhausen, was described as the
most curiously tesselated, or rather mosaic, piece of work-
manship ; and when it was asserted that there exists no
parallel instance of any such composition; nay, that, from
a literary point of view, such construction of it seems in-
credible.)
IX. Later Rabbinic Modifications and Adaptations of
specific Laws, especially in the ' Priest-Code*
These modifications and adaptations are (at least in part)
here enumerated, chiefly because they afford presumptive
evidence that what we know as the Mosaic Legislation
could not have been of late date, since, in many points, it
was so little adapted to the circumstances of later times,
that the Eabbinic Law had to introduce modifications and
additions to render the old Mosaic Law practicable. Gene-
rally, also, the reader may be interested in having placed
KABBINIC MODIFICATIONS. 385
before Mm some of these Kabbinic adaptations of the Mosaic
Law. Not to speak of the original sources in the Talmud
and Midrashiin, as well as in dogmatic works, from which
our knowledge must here be derived, even such literature of
the subject as is generally accessible to the student is scat-
tered over many tractates, brochures, and articles, or else
incidentally treated in books on kindred subjects, so that a
fall apparatus criticus would be very difficult. But the
following may be mentioned as most easily accessible:
Saalschiitz, d. Mos. Recht; Hamburger's Real^Encyklopcedie;
and, in reference to certain points .bearing on the criticism of
the Pentateuch, the Articles by Hoffmann in the Magazin
fur d. Wissensch. d. Judenthums (as regards the Sacrificial
Laws, vol. iv., 1877, pp. 1-17 ; 62-76 ; 125-141 ; 210-218 ;
as regards the Law of Witnesses, vol. v. pp. 1-14; and as
regards the theory of Wellhausen and of his school, vol. vi.,
1879, pp. 1-19 ; 90-114 ; 219-237 ; vol. vii., 1880, pp. 137-
156 ; 237-254) ; and especially D. Castelli, La Legge, 1884.
To the latter I am here especially indebted, although my
standpoint is the opposite of his ; and I have followed the
lead of Castelli in the brief and general review, which was
all that could be attempted in this place.
1. The * Priest-Code.' In the text of these Lectures
the view has been expressed that the Mosaic arrangements
must have been prospective, and that at the time of their
introduction, the services of the Tabernacle could not have
been regularly carried out. On the opposite theory of the
introduction of the Priest-Code at the time of Ezra, and for
the purposes of the priesthood, we would have expected
detailed arrangements. But, as a matter of fact, such are
not found in the Priest-Code, while they are supplemented
at a later period. Thus, as regards the sacrificial functions
of the High-Priest, no distinction is apparently made be-
00
386 APPENDIX n,
tween him and ordinary priests, and only the services of the
Day of Atonement are assigned to him in Lev. xvi. 2, 3,
whereas, in Eabbinic Law, he had, besides other functions,
the precedence of officiating every other day in the Sanc-
tuary (Yom. 14 a). Similarly, the Pentateuch is silent
about the order and succession of the various priestly families
in the ministry of the Sanctuary. We remember that this
was only fixed by the arrangement of the priesthood into
twenty-four courses in the time of David, while tradition
ascribes to Moses an arrangement into eight or else sixteen
'courses,' which relieved each other every week. But it
seems incredible that, if the Priest-Code had dated from
the time of Ezra, it would not have contained some such
arrangement.
Again, it militates against the supposed later origin
of the Pentateuch, that whereas Lev. xxi. 7 forbids the
marriage of a priest, among others, with one who is gene-
rally designated as ' profane,' the Talmud explains this, quite
in the spirit of the times of Ezra and later, as one who was
the offspring of an unlawful marriage by a priest, adding
prohibition of marriage with a proselyte, one who had been
a slave, had previously contracted an unlawful marriage, or
been divorced, according to the provisions of the law of
Levirate. Of all this the Priest-Code says nothing, although
we would certainly have expected it on the theory in contro-
versy.
In the opposite direction evidence of the older date of the
Mosaic legislation comes to us from the later Eabbinic modi-
fication of the ancient law that ordered a sinning daughter
of Aaron to be burned and this, alike as regards the mode
of her execution, and the cases to which the law applied. On
the other hand, the same later spirit, as compared with the
Priest-Code, appears in the permission of summary vengeance
RABBINIC MODiFtOATiONS. 38f
on priests who officiated in a state of Levitical defilement. 1
Similarly, the early Mosaic code, which fixed the commence-
ment of the Levitical ministry at thirty, and its termination
at fifty, years of age, 2 was already modified in 1 Chron. xxiii.
24, 27, 3 while the Talmud adds that the limitation to
fifty years of age applied only to the wilderness-period,
when the severe work of the transport of the Tabernacle
required full strength. 4 But these modifications seem
utterly incompatible with the origination of the Priest^Code
in the time of Ezra. Lastly, on this point, it is evident that
if the Priest-Code had been of such late date if, indeed, it
had not been quite prospective it would have provided for
all those priestly officials whose services were afterwards
found requisite, and who, according to Eabbinic Law,
formed a staff of hierarchic officers attached to the Temple. 5
From the priesthood we naturally pass to the provision
made for its support. Here also the details and pro-
visions found necessary in later legislation prove the early
date and prospective character of the Pentateuch-legislation.
Thus, whereas Numb, xviii. 12 assigns to the priesthood
the first-fruits of the wheat, the later Law extends this to
seven kinds of grain, to dates, and fruits, and pomegranates. 6
Similarly, the general statement that the first of the dough
was to be offered to the Lord, is interpreted in the Mishnah
as meaning that it was to be given to the priests. 7 And
from the direction in Numb. xv. 19, together with that in
Deut. xviii. 4, it was further inferred that firstfruits of every-
thing were to be given to the priest before any other offering,
1 Lev. xxii. 2-9 ; comp. Sanh. 81 b.
* Numb. iv. 3, 23, 30, 39 see, however, Numb. viii. 24.
* Oomp. Ezra iii. 8. * Choi. 24 a.
5 On the various Temple officials, see The Temple, its Ministry and
Services. y
6 Bikkur. i. 3. Ohall. ii. 5, 7 } comp. Jos. Ant. ii. 4. 4.
888 APPENDIX IL
or before any use was made of the produce 1 . Indeed, strict-
ness in this respect was one of the distinctive marks of the
Pharisee. This was called the Terumah gedolah, the pro-
portion of which was not fixed, but supposed to amount to at
least one-sixtieth. 1 On the other hand, the Talmud limits
the provision of Lev. xxvii. 32, which seems to assign to the
priesthood the tenth of the herds and flocks, by declaring
that the proprietors were to make of these a sacrificial meal,
in which the fat was to be burned on the altar, and the blood
sprinkled, while only that part of them was to go to the
priests which was theirs in votive offerings. 2 Moreover, the
Rabbis fixed, in connection with Deut. xiv. 22-29, what was
called a second tithe, of which a festive meal was to be
made in Jerusalem every year, while every third year it was
to be given to the poor (the poor's tithe). 3 And in connec-
tion with all this the Mishnah has those elaborate pro-
visions collected in the tractate Demai, which fix the ordi-
nances in reference to the produce, concerning which it is
doubtful whether tithes had been given or not.
A slight consideration will convince that, if the priest-
arrangements had originated in later times, some provision
would have been made to secure that the High-priests should
possess revenues larger than those of the common priests.
This, especially in the period after Ezra, when the civil
government mainly devolved upon them. Accordingly we
find that the Talmud directs that, if the High-priest had not
property of his own, the other priests were to contribute so
much, that his income should exceed that of any single
common priest. Similarly, the High-priest was to have pre-
cedence over every other priest in regard to the sacrifices
and gifts offered in the Sanctuary. On the other hand, the
Ter. iii. 6 ; iv. 3. 2 Zebhach. 56 5.
3 Koslx ha-Sh. 12 1.
KABBINIC MODIFICATIONS. 389
Pentateuch makes no difference between the High-priest and
common priests as regards property or revenues.
If we were to read the Pentateuch without fully entering
into the symbolic meaning of sacrificial worship, we could
only wonder at the absence of any mention of public prayer
in its services. We can understand it from the standpoint of
the Pentateuch, as the original Mosaic legislation, but not
from that of later times, especially those which witnessed
the institution of Synagogue-worship. Accordingly, the
Rabbinic law fixed, not only certain times for prayer, but
also introduced prayer in the services of the Temple.
A somewhat similar development appears in the Rabbinic
enlargement of the prohibition in Lev. xxii. 8 into special
directions how animals were to be slaughtered for human
food. 1 "We mark similar enlargements, showing the altera-
tions of later times as compared with the primitive arrange-
ments of the Pentateuch, even in regard to the preparation
of the incense, which, according to Exod. xxx. 34-38, was to
consist of four ingredients, while the Talmud adds to these
other seven perfumes, besides salt and other materials. 2 The
preparation is said to have been a secret, hereditary in one
family. The same inferences come to us when comparing
the detailed rubrics concerning the mode of sacrificing, and
the various rites at the festivals, with the very primitive and
general directions of the Pentateuch. We mark in them
what a later time required, when all these observances were
carried into constant and universal practice. Even so simple
an arrangement as that which regulated the annual Temple-
tribute, had not been provided for, but was fixed by the
Rabbinic law.
Evidence as to the later requirements of more detailed
ordinances than those in the Pentateuch in regard to festive
1 Choi. 27 a ; 82 a. Kerith. 6 a ; Jer. Yom. 41 d.
390 APPENDIX It
sacrifices and especially what was known as the chagigak-^-
multiplies upon us as we compare the directions of the
Rabbis with the provisions of the Mosaic Law. They indi-
cate further need, due to the circumstances of later times.
In any case, some more detailed provisions must have been
made, if the Priest>Code had been of late origin. And be-
yond all this we may here refer to the rites in the admission
of proselytes, to the details about what rendered an animal
fit or unfit for sacrifices, and to other ritual questions, the
difficulties of which would occur in later practice. Even as
regards the supposed new institution, or at least transforma-
tion, of the festivals of the first and fifteenth day" of the
seventh month, we mark how entirely different, or at least
how largely elaborated, they appear in Kabbinic tradition
that is, as actually observed in later times. The same might
be predicated of the observances of the Day of Atonement.
Nor to extend our view beyond the Priest-Code do we
here require to remind ourselves of the similar transforma-
tion in regard to the Sabbatic law, while we might almost
ask ourselves why there should not have been in the Priest-
Code, if it were of later date, some allusion to such a festival
as that of Esther (Purim), or any, however disguised, refer-
ence to the taking of Jerusalem by the enemy, which might
have been introduced in some connection with the Day of
Atonement.
Evidence in the same direction comes to us as we com-
pare the principles laid down in the Mosaic Legislation as to
the dedication of animals, things, or persons to the Sanc-
tuary, as also concerning vows, with those of later times, as
explained in the traditional Law. The same remarks might be
made in regard to the mode of trying a woman suspected of
adultery ; in regard to the directions given about phylacteries,
and the fringes to be worn on the garments, the Sabbatic
RABBINIC MODIFICATIONS. 39l
year, that of Jubilee, and other ordinances, in all of -which
the Kabbinic Law marks the practical requirements or ques-
tions arising in later times as compared with the simplicity
of the earlier Mosaic Law.
2. Very partial as this review has necessarily been, it
is hoped that it may effectually support the argument in
favour of the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch legisla-
tion. And it might have been extended, to show that other
portions of the Pentateuch also must have been of earlier
date than recent criticism has assigned to them. Even
Castelli admits the existence of such a difference between
the Pentateuch legislation generally and that of tradition, 1
and that the latter must, in many respects, be regarded as
an adaptation of the ancient Law to later circumstances and
to questions then arising. 2 But it may, I think, be most
reasonably argued that . such further development and con-
ciliation would, in very many cases, not have been requisite
that the new wants would have been at least initially in-
dicated if the introduction and teaching of the Pentateuch
had dated from the year 444, and if it had received so many
further accretions after that period. 3
1 Castelli (La Legge, pp. 90, 91) marks retrogression upon the Bible
in the multiplication and aggravation of observances and commandments ;
andp'o^rresszVminthe mitigation of the primitive civil, and criminal code.
In truth, it is neither the one nor the other but evidence of the ancient
date of the Pentateuch legislation, which was afterwards adapted both
to new circumstances and new forms of thought.
3 By the side of this element there is that other of unceasing elabora-
tion of the Law, with the view of preventing any possible breach of it,
and, in fact, adding to its requirements, so as to ensure a perfect obedi-
ence .of them.
For the criticism of the objections raised by Wellhausen from a
comparative view of the contents of the Pentateuch, I can in this place
only once more refer to the Articles of Hoffmann, previously mentioned.